Keem 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 service. This key question has been rated 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.

People made decisions about how they wanted their care delivered. Staff told us about 1 person who wanted to have their fluids unthickened, against speech and therapist advice. The staff member told us they tried to convince the person to have their fluids thickened which would be good for them, but the person refused. Staff knew they had to do what the person wanted, but we found the recording of those decisions needed improving. Another person wanted staff to help them, but not with all aspects of personal care. Staff respected this person’s choice. The registered manager told us they periodically reviewed care plans to ensure they were accurate and continued to reflect people’s preferences and routines.

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.

The provider linked up with other health and social care professionals to support peoples’ continuity of care. In 1 example, the registered manager told us they attended multi-disciplinary meetings with a variety of professionals to ensure the support a person received, remained relevant. There was input from speech and language therapists to help people at risk of choking and district nurse teams supported a person to manage their skin integrity.

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

The assessment process looked at people’s ability to communicate as well as their hearing and vision. One person used a white board to communicate their day-to-day choices with staff and to help with conversation. Staff said the person used their white board, especially when they went to hospital or doctor appointments. A staff member said because they knew them well, the person sometimes let the staff member speak on their behalf, but the person would step in if they felt they needed to be heard. Staff explained how their understanding of the person’s communication had developed so the person’s reliance on their whiteboard had lessened over time.

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.

A relative told the registered manager, they were happy with the service provided to their family member. The registered manager completed observations of staff practice and kept in touch with people and families which provided an opportunity for people to share any feedback.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

New people to the service were signposted to other healthcare professionals to support their ongoing health needs. This included local GP practices and district nurse teams, as well as speech and language therapists and mental health teams. Staff understood which services to call if people needed medical help. The registered manager told us they operated an on-call telephone support outside working hours to provide any guidance to people and staff in an emergency.

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.

Staff completed mandatory training, that included equality and diversity training to ensure they understood their responsibility to support people without discrimination. Staff told us they felt confident to speak up if they felt people were not get the help they needed. In 1 example, a staff member told us how they supported a person with limited vocal communication. This staff member said, “[Person] takes their white board to appointments, but they let me speak on their behalf as I know them, but they do express their needs if needed.” The registered manager told us they worked closely with multi-disciplinary teams to ensure people got the right support and access to treatment.

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.

At the time of our visit no one was receiving end of life care. No one had chosen to have discussions about their end-of-life future plans; however, people had decided how they wanted care to be given in the event of a cardiac event. The registered manager said because staff supported people around the clock, people were able to make and influence any decisions about what they wanted to do.