Integral Focus Support and 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 provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained as 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.

Personalised care plans were in place that included people’s support needs and how they liked to be supported. Care plans included people’s backgrounds and detailed information on support required such as with personal care, continence and when out in the community.

Staff told us they knew how people liked to be supported and gave us examples of people’s preferences. Staff told us that care plans were helpful, and how it helped them in their roles. A staff member told us, “We always read the care plans; it is very helpful and helps us look after people.”

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.

Staff regularly assessed people's needs with their involvement and, where appropriate, input from health and social care professionals. Care plans were updated to reflect changes in needs and supported consistent, coordinated care. The staff team communicated effectively to ensure continuity of care and minimise disruption to people's wellbeing during periods of change.

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

The principles of Accessible Information Standards were being met ensuring people received information in accessible formats. Communication plans included information on how to communicate effectively with people and people’s preferred communication style. Staff told us that they had access to communication materials when required to communicate with people effectively and communication plans supported them.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support.

Quality monitoring systems were in place to obtain feedback from people such as through spot checks and telephone monitoring. Staff regularly checked in with people and their relatives, listened to their views and sought their feedback. Relatives told us they had not had to make any complaints recently but knew who to contact if they had any concerns. A relative said, “If I’m concerned, I talk to them [care workers or registered manager].”

There were systems to manage concerns and complaints. A complaint policy detailed the process of managing complaints. No complaints had been received. Staff were able to tell us the process to manage complaints and concerns, which was escalated to management for review.

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

Support and care were available when people needed it. The management team reviewed care regularly to ensure people had access to care and support they needed. The management team were also on call if people needed emergency support. Staff also considered people’s mobility and physical support needs when planning activities and outings, ensuring venues were accessible and suitable, with appropriate arrangements for wheelchair or walking frame use where required. This meant people were supported to access the same opportunities as others, with appropriate adjustments made to promote meaningful participation.

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 received care that reflected their individual needs, preferences and desired outcomes. Staff took the time to understand what was important to each person and used this information to provide personalised support.

Care was delivered in a way that promoted people’s dignity, independence and wellbeing. Staff considered people’s individual circumstances and preferences when providing care and support.

People were supported to express their views and make choices about their care and daily lives. This helped ensure people received personalised support and experienced outcomes that were important and meaningful to them.

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 inspection no one was receiving end of life care. Staff we spoke to told us they were not currently supporting anyone on end-of-life care. The registered manager said if they supported someone with end-of-life care needs they would develop a care plan to discuss the person's wishes and would ensure staff were adequately trained.

Systems were in place to discuss end-of-life care and planning for the future, to ensure people’s needs and wishes were identified, should this be required.People had DNARs in place as required, and people were involved in the planning of their advanced care support needs.