New Vision Care Services

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 service met people’s needs.

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

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff at the service 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. Improvements had been made to people’s care records to enable person-centred care. They included detailed information about people’s preferences and guidance about how they wished and needed to be supported. People and their relatives told us staff knew people’s needs and responded to any change of their needs. A relative commented, “Staff are very flexible I can just ring and say about a change in need or [Name] is in hospital.”

Staff understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. Care staff received information and training before they started providing care and support for them to understand people’s individual health and care needs. However, people did not all receive care and support from a group of the same care staff to enable continuity. A relative commented, “[Name] has to tell staff what to do all the time, everything has to be repeated.”

Staff at the service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The provider was aware of the Accessible Information Standard. Information could be made available in different formats, depending upon individual need. For example, we saw the service user guide was available in large print.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. The service had a system in place to seek feedback from people and their loved ones. We reviewed the many compliments that had been received. Relatives told us they were aware of the complaint's procedure. A relative commented, “I cannot complain, staff look after us.”

Staff at the service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The service worked with other professionals to support people and to ensure they had any equipment they needed. There was an on-call system when the office was closed. A relative commented, “If I ring at 8pm at night, staff always get back to me.”

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. People and their relatives did not report any concerns in relation to any experience of discrimination and inequality from the service. Staff worked to ensure reasonable adjustments were in place for everyone, so people did not experience discrimination because of their disability and needs. People’s care records included information around people’s identity, things which were important to them, their wishes and relationships they wanted to maintain.

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. Where wishes for future care had been discussed, this was detailed within people’s care plans to ensure these were recorded.