Community Care Advice 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.

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 68 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices.

Person centred care plans were not in place. Although care plans included the support people required, it did not include people’s background and person-centred information on how they would like to be supported. For example, some care plans lacked specific details on people’s preferences with personal care such as with showering and how they would like to be supported in this area for example, information on one care plan included a person needed support with showering without detailing how they would like to be supported in this area. In addition, some people required nutritional support, there was no information on people’s preferences with food such as what they liked and disliked to ensure personalised support can be provided.

We fed this back to the registered manager, who informed they would update the care plans to ensure it was person centred.

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 had a positive relationship with staff and had access to services. Staff told us that people had access to health services when needed. Staff completed daily notes when care was delivered to ensure people received continuity of care.

The registered manager told us the service ensured where possible for people to have the same care staff to form positive relationships and people received good care provisions and continuity of care.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Communication plans were not in place that included information on how to communicate effectively with people and people’s preferred communication style. Records showed as part of pre-assessment, people’s ability to communicate was recorded such as one person had hearing difficulties and another person spoke limited English. This level of information was not recorded on the care plan and assessed to ensure how staff can communicate with people effectively.

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

People were able to share feedback about their care through reviews and surveys.

The registered manager and staff told us that systems were in place to obtain feedback from people and involve them in decisions such as regular reviews with people on their care. Quality monitoring systems were in place to obtain feedback, and reviews were held with people to attain feedback on how they would like to be supported.

There were systems to manage concerns and complaints. A complaint policy was in place that detailed the process of managing complaints. Complaints had been received, which was investigated and managed according to the policy. Staff were also able to tell us the process to manage complaints and concerns, which was escalated to management for review. A relative told us, “We would know that we should complain to the office if we had to and we do have a number but we never needed to complain about anything. We were happy with all the care that [person] received.”

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

Care and support that people received were agreed with people and their relatives prior to care being started. Reviews were carried out regularly to ensure people had access to care and support they needed. There was an on-call systems should people needed emergency support.

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’s equality characteristics such as their race and religion were recorded therefore the cultural and spiritual needs of people were taken into account when providing a service.

Staff had a good knowledge of people’s beliefs and cultural needs. People were engaged and supported by managers and staff to be included and have the same opportunity as others to receive the care and support of their choice. Staff had received equality and diversity training and understood people had a right to be treated equally and fairly, and to receive care and support that met their specific needs. For example, the registered and staff confirmed people had the right to choose the gender of staff who provided their intimate personal care. Care plans contained detailed information about people’s spiritual and cultural needs. Staff were aware of people’s diverse spiritual and cultural needs and wishes and knew how to protect them from discriminatory behaviours and practices.

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.

People’s future aspirations were discussed with them as part of reviews, which included the level of support required to ensure people can be independent.

The registered manager and staff told us they discussed future aspirations regularly with people such as what they would like to do in the future, and this included how they wanted to be independent and how that could be achieved.

People were not receiving end of life care during the assessment. The provider had policies in place to help guide staff on how to support people to express their preferences on end-of-life care if needed.