Covenant Healthcare Ltd Also known as Heritatge Healthcare Coventry

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 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 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. There had been improvements in the way people’s care plans reflected their individual needs and preferences, and the terms used to refer to people. People and their families told us they were happy with the care, which was provided in ways which met people’s individual’s needs. People and relatives told us they were involved in care planning and reviews. This helped to ensure these were tailored to meet people’s individual preferences and wishes. Staff told us people’s care plans provided them with the information they needed to respond to people’s individual wishes and guided them on how people liked their care to be delivered. Staff gave examples showing how they adapted the care provided as people’s needs and preferences changed. This included providing additional care to meet people’s emotional and physical needs. A senior staff member told us, “We have one [person] who needs some emotional support which is done over the phone, and we have another [person who] occasionally needs additional support from staff, so we go back out and help them.” Staff we talked with knew how to support people, however, we found staff would benefit from more guidance to ensure there was a consistent approach to supporting a person who sometimes experienced low mood. The registered manager told us they would review the person’s care records.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice. However, people did not always receive support from the same staff and people and relatives had mixed views on the impact of changing staff on their care. One person told us, “I get different [staff] most of the time, I have to explain tasks such as explaining where things go.” One relative said, “The only real gripe is they send so many different [staff] all the time.” The relative explained this meant sometimes elements of care were missed, and unfamiliar staff required their family member’s support needs to be re-explained. Other people and relatives told us changes in staff teams did not adversely affect the quality and safety of the care provided, because staff used the wide range of skills they had to care for people. Some staff said they provided care to the same people, while other staff told us they were regularly allocated to provide care to different people. However, people told us staff understood their health and care needs and worked flexibly to ensure their needs were met. People and staff gave us examples showing how staff responded to their needs whilst working with other health professionals. We saw the service had received positive feedback from other health and social care professionals regarding their approach to working flexibly with people with and responding to their needs. This included providing care at different locations, so the person’s preferences would be met.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Relatives confirmed their family member’s communication needs had been assessed and were being met by staff. Staff gave examples showing how they responded to people’s differing care needs. One staff member explained they supported one person’s communication needs by using the person’s iPad to offer choices and gain the person’s views. Processes were in place to record people’s communication needs and any equipment or adaptations they needed to ensure they understood information about their care.

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. People using the service and their relatives told us they felt able to speak up and raise any concerns. They knew who the registered manager was, and who to contact should this be needed. One person told us, “I do say what I think and wouldn’t be frightened to do so. I just would ring the office.” One relative said, “We would just tell the carers and it generally gets sorted. We would be comfortable to raise any concerns, and [senior staff] would sort it out.” Another relative explained they had provided feedback about care call times. The relative told us they had discussed the feedback with staff, and it had been resolved to their satisfaction. Staff understood how to support people and how to escalate any complaints.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People’s protected characteristics were considered when their care was planned and delivered. Staff gave examples of adjustments they had made to how they supported people. This included adapting how and where they cared for people and collaborative working with external health and social care professionals and advocating for people, to ensure they had access to the health care they wanted. Staff responded to people’s cultural and religious needs, so they would be encouraged to access all aspects of assessed and planned care. One staff member said, “We have one client, we make sure they have their scarf on, and they like to have their prayer beads with them because of their religious beliefs.”

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 had improved health outcomes because of the support staff had provided. Staff gave us examples showing how people’s mobility and independence had improved because of the care delivered to them. Staff told us the provider had given them guidance to help explain about different cultures. This included how to prepare a range of meals, which reflected people’s cultural preferences, so people would be encouraged to have enough to eat and drink so they would remain well.

People were not always supported to identify their preferences and plan for important life changes, including at the end of their life. Processes needed to be further developed to ensure people’s detailed wishes for their futures had been considered and planned for. People and their relatives told us end of life discussions had not yet started. Relatives said although their family member’s preferences had not yet been fully planned for, they would be comfortable to raise this at their family member’s next care plan review. However, one person told us, “I have the feeling [staff] would do everything they can to keep me at home, as I want.” A staff member gave us an example showing how they had supported someone at the end of their life so the person received the care they wanted. The staff member said, “The [person] always liked someone to be with them, and so we did [this]. They wanted to change their clothes twice daily, so we gave 100% support and would bring them a range of clothes until they were happy.” Some clinical information, such as ReSPECT forms, [Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment], and DNACPR, [do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation], had started to be gathered by staff and were referred to in people’s plans. Care plans needed to be consistently expanded to ensure staff knew where to locate these within people’s homes. We fed this back to the registered manager, who confirmed they would start to explore and plan for people’s preferences and advanced wishes.