Inner City Care, Sherwood House

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to Good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 64 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care plans contained personalised information were detailed, person-centred and included people’s choices and preferences. People and where appropriate, their relatives were involved with regular reviews of the care provided. Where external support was needed, input from health and social care professionals was also requested.

People told us staff understood what was important to them. One person said,” I know what food and clothes that I want to eat and wear. They support me but I make my own decisions.” Another person said, “Oh, they know what I like-they are `bang on.”

Staff told us the care records helped them to understand people’s choices and preferences. A staff member said, “The care plans tell you things such as people’s likes, dislikes, health status, ethnicity and much more.”

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People had access to their care plan and daily notes via the electronic system the provider used. However, for those unable to use this system, paper-based records were still available.

The provider sent regular newsletters to people. They had amended these letters by having them translated into people’s first language. We saw examples of letters written in Urdu, Punjabi, and Italian. This helped to reduce the risk of discrimination.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment, and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

People knew how to give feedback about their experiences of care and support including how to raise any concerns or issues and can do so in a range of accessible ways.This included in a formal written complaint, telephone complaint if raising issues with care staff. People, their family and friends felt confident that if they complained, they would be taken seriously and treated compassionately.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in experiences and outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

People were supported to make informed choices about their care and plan their future care while they have the capacity to do so. People’s decisions and what matters to them are delivered through personalised care plans that are shared with others who may need to be informed.