Vermuyden Care

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 75 (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 was person-centred and tailored to people’s individual needs. People’s care plans reflected their backgrounds and interest, choices and preferences. People had regular care workers and people and their relatives told us staff knew them well, understood their needs and felt they received a personalised service. One person said, “Yes, [staff] know me, one in particular, she comes at least twice a day.” A relative said; “Yes, they do everything we want.”

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. Care and support were joined up and there were good links with local community-based health and care services.

People told us the service tried to provide the same staff or group of staff consistently. For instance, 1 person said, “Usually, I have the same group of 4 carers. Now and again, they use me for training with a new carer.” Another person said, “Some know me well. A young one said, ‘I have filled the kettle for you, for the morning.’ She knows I struggle in the morning to lift the kettle and fill it.”

Relatives said, “Two [staff] in particular do 80% and we tend to know the others” and “We see the same carers.”

The provider worked to supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to people’s individual needs. People’s care records included guidance in relation to their communication needs, in line with the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). This is a requirement of publicly funded providers to meet the information and communication needs of people with a disability or sensory loss.

One relative told us staff tailored communication to suit their family member, saying, “Light-hearted banter. Using the language and expressions [my family member] uses so [my family member] is not overwhelmed.”

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. People knew how to give feedback about their experiences of care and support including how to raise any concerns or issues. People’s comments included, “No concerns, I get looked after well”, “If I wanted to make a complaint I would phone the office” and “I’m quite content. I would phone them.”

It was clear the management team saw complaints and concerns as an opportunity for learning and improvement. Records showed complaints and concerns were dealt with in an open and transparent way. They were explored thoroughly and people received a response in good time.

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People had equal access to care and support because the provider complied with legal equality and human rights requirements, including avoiding discrimination, considering the needs of people with different protected characteristics and making reasonable adjustments.

One person said, “[Staff] show respect of my beliefs”. One person’s relative said, “The consistency of the care pool of 8 carers works. Same programme and agenda. We’ve not had to make huge adjustments. It works out well for us.”

The management team and staff actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. One person said, “I am involved in decisions about my care and my care plan” Another person said, “They listen to me. They know my likes and dislikes.” A relative said, “Yes, [staff] listen. They know[my family member’s] likes and dislikes. I would raise any concerns.”

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 people had discussed their end-of-life care wishes, this was recorded in their care plans.