Archived: The Daley Care Centre

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 71 (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 and support was person-centred. We observed members of staff were caring and interacted positively with people. We saw evidence in people’s care plans regarding their life history. People and relatives told us that care was delivered in a person-centred way and staff knew people well. One relative said, “The staff are amazing, they treat [name] very well.”

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. People’s needs were clearly identified in their care plans and there were good links with health and care services. There was an emergency pack available in peoples care plans with detailed information to be able to use to ensure continuity of care. For example, if they were admitted to hospital.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. We saw information displayed appropriately in the service and where appropriate people were involved in developing their care and support and activity planner.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Relatives knew who to contact if they needed to make raise any concerns and they all felt they were listened to, and any issues were acted on. One relative said, "I felt [name] wasn’t having as much physio as they should have and I did speak to them [staff] about it. The home didn’t know what they should be getting, but they did get on to it straight away and sorted it out."

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The service worked in partnership with other local health and care services to ensure people’s needs were met.

Staff and leaders 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. People told us they received the correct care and support. One person said, “We go out regularly, 2-3 hours to the garden centre and we have also been to Bakewell on a day trip. It keeps my brain active."

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 a medical emergency or at the end of their life. We saw end of life care plans had lack of detail, some just recorded, ‘person is a young age not appropriate to discuss.’ Therefore, they did not reflect people's wishes or show that individuals had been involved in discussions. There was a lack of evidence that people's preferences were documented or that they had participated in conversations about what they wanted to happen in the event of a medical emergency. This was discussed with the registered manager, who agreed to address this.