Mercy & Clara Healthcare Ltd

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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered home care service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 68 (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. Although we received positive feedback confirming staff knew people very well and had a good understanding of their needs, the provider’s care records needed updating to reflect current needs of one person. As a result of our feedback, the provider had updated the care plans and risk assessments to reflect one person’s current needs and to support care staff. A staff member told us, “Because we are a small team, we discuss everything in detail, like changes to their routine, changes in mood, or health we all get to know about it.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Although there were some shortfalls in how the provider conducted their audits and analysis, relatives told us their loved one had the same staff members and this had ensured continuity. A relative said, “[Name] gets the same carers they know [name] well.” This made people and their relatives feel better, and they had built a relationship with staff and management.

The provider supplied appropriate, information tailored to individual needs. People and their relatives were able to access important information safely and securely, as a copy of the provider’s records was kept in their home. While the person’s communication needs were discussed during their initial assessment, these details hadn’t been fully documented in their care plan. Despite this, staff demonstrated a good understanding of how to communicate effectively with people, which was confirmed by one person’s relative. We raised this with the registered manager, who agreed more detail was needed and assured us care records would be updated accordingly.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people and their relatives in decisions about their care. People and their relatives had opportunities to give feedback about the care and support they received. This was done through reviews they completed with people and their relatives. Relatives were confident the management team would be available and listen to their feedback as a matter of priority and any concerns they may raise would be listened to. They added, “They [management] are always available if we need anything, they are very approachable, so we have no issues in that area.”

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. There was an out of hours process in place for people to be able to call on if they needed support. The provider made referrals to other healthcare professionals to support people and to ensure they could seek advice and had any equipment they may need.

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. The provider and the care staff had regular interaction with people and relatives to review their needs and find out if further support was needed. For example, during a review, the provider had noted one person required additional support, this was discussed with the family and local authority who increased the hours to reflect support needed.

People were not always 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. There was limited information around people’s wishes and how they would like to be supported for example, about end of life. Although the providers documentation asked what people’s ‘wishes, and life goals’ were, this was never recorded in care plans. We raised this with the provider who committed to review this with people as part of their care plan reviews.