Sentricare Birmingham

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 inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to receiving and acting on complaints. Improvements were found at this assessment, and the provider was no longer in breach of this regulation.

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 received person-centred care that was in line with their preferences, likes and dislikes. Staff and the management team knew people well and knew how they wanted to be supported.

People’s care plans were individualised and detailed how people wanted to be supported in line with their individual likes and dislikes. One relative told us, “Support is flexible and fits around her personal routines and preferences.” Another relative told us, “Any changes needed have been handled pretty well so far.”

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 received support from a consistent staff team. One relative said, “We have had the same carers for a long time now, [person] feels comfortable with them and they provide a good experience for us all as a family.” Staff confirmed they supported the same people, and this enabled consistency and continuity in the care and support people received. The registered manager told us when people’s needs increased, the service referred to the local authority for additional support.

People received care and treatment in line with their assessed needs. Staff worked closely with community health care providers and knew when to refer people for specialist care. They accessed support, advice and treatment for people from physiotherapists, district nurses, general practitioners, and social workers.

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

Since 2016 onwards all organisations that provide publicly funded adult social care are legally required to follow the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The standard was introduced to make sure people are given information in a way they can understand. The standard applies to all people with a disability, impairment or sensory loss and in some circumstances to their carers.

The provider supplied appropriate, up to date information in formats tailored to each person’s needs. Information was delivered in a timely manner, met best practice standards, complied with legal requirements, and supported individual choice.

People using the service and, where appropriate, their families, friends, and carers received information that was accessible, safe, and secure, helping to uphold their rights.

Individual communication and accessibility needs were identified, recorded, highlighted and shared effectively. These needs were regularly reviewed to ensure staff continued to provide care and treatment in line with the Accessible Information Standard.

Staff were supported to understand people’s communication requirements and received additional training where necessary, enabling them to meet those needs confidently and consistently.

At the last inspection, we found the provider did not always act on complaints received. At this inspection we found improvements had been made.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback, ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. .People were involved in decisions about their care, and staff explained what had changed as a result.

People told us they knew how to make a formal complaint if they needed to and were confident it would be taken seriously by the registered manager. The service had a complaints policy, which included information about how to appeal a decision and contact details for the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman.

We found no formal complaints had been raised, informal concerns were recorded and addressed. People told us they were listened to and were confident concerns would be dealt with. One person told us, “I have only ever made minor complaints which have been addressed either by the carers or Manager.” A relative told us, “Never needed to complain so never needed to see anyone, any worry I am sure would be sorted.”

Staff and leaders listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care and support in response to this.

The provider ensured that people were able to access the care, support and treatment they required in a timely manner. The service demonstrated a strong commitment to meeting people’s individual access needs, including cultural, gender‑based, physical and health‑related requirements.

People did not experience discrimination or inequality in the delivery of their care. Policies were in place to promote equality, diversity and inclusion, and staff received relevant training to support these values. Care plans contained the essential information staff needed to understand and respond to people’s individual needs.

Staff and leaders listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care and support in response to this.

The provider complied with legal equality and human rights requirements, including avoiding discrimination and having regard to the needs of people with different protected characteristics. The provider was alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage people who used the service and proactively sought to address barriers to improve people’s experience.

People’s religious and cultural needs were discussed at their initial assessments and recorded in their care plans.

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.

This included sensitive and proactive planning for end of life care, ensuring individuals’ wishes, preferences and needs were fully considered and respected. People’s wishes were respected if they chose not to discuss this aspect of their care.