Genuine Carers - Kirklees

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

People’s care and treatment was assessed and reviewed, taking into account their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs. There was a person-centred approach although there was mixed and sometimes contradictory feedback from people and families about how well they were involved in the assessment process. People’s care and support plans reflected their needs and consideration was made for any protected equality characteristics. The service was continually seeking ways to improve. The service planned and delivered people’s care and support with them, ensuring their individual needs and preferences were considered. People’s care and support was regularly reviewed and there were processes in place to check people’s expectations were met. Staff worked with people to obtain their consent and they respected their wishes around their care and support, promoting their independence, choice and control. People and relatives told us consent was consistently sought from people before care support was given.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People and relatives confirmed they had been involved in the planning of people's care needs, both when the service commenced and when updates were needed.

The registered manager said people and relatives were central to the assessment of their needs and what the service could provide for them. They said they involved as many professionals as possible to help get a better understanding of needs. The provider was able to provide authorisation for people to access their electronic care records. Using the information gathered, the registered manager said they looked at staff training needs to ensure needs could be met.

Individual assessments were completed before services commenced. Detailed assessment of needs showed, for example, times of care, specific tasks, risk management, people’s routines and preferences. Reviews were completed annually, or sooner if people’s needs changed. Care records showed people, relatives and professionals were involved. Staff meetings included a standing agenda item concerned with reviewing people’s needs and whether any changes need to be made.

Most feedback we received about the care people received was positive. However, a relative said the gender preference of workers caring for their loved one had not been followed up appropriately, even after complaining about this.

The registered manager said where only male care workers attended calls, this had sometimes been unavoidable and they tried to let people know beforehand. They had recently made some changes to the rota to try and ensure this didn't happen again. The registered manager spoke with staff about similarly worded daily notes and encouraged staff to record more specific detail, such as people's mood, what they ate and changes in condition.

At our last inspection, we found some examples where identical daily notes had been copied from previous entries. At this inspection, whilst not identical, we found daily care notes did not always illustrate how evidence based care was delivered and saw they were repetitive and sometimes lacked detail.We raised this with the registered manager.

Relatives we spoke with consistently said that where English was preferred as the way staff should communicate, this wish was not always followed. On occasions, staff communicated in other languages which left people feeling excluded. Feedback we received showed the service worked well with partner organisations, in order to meet aspects of care, including mobility and nursing needs.

The registered manager said they had met with staff and reminded them about the importance of staff speaking in English, where this was the person's first language. Staff and leaders consistently told us teamwork was a strength of the service. The registered manager said they made referrals to partner organisations and had also set up multi-agency meetings to bring organisational partners together to agree ways to meet people's needs.

Partners we spoke with said the provider worked well with them and had been responsive to their support and guidance

Care and support plans showed input from other professionals and evidence of working together. Staff meeting minutes included a standing agenda item to discuss individual care and support needs. This gave opportunity for staff to discuss whether input from other professionals was required.

People did not share any concerns with us regarding the provider's ability to support them in meeting their healthcare needs. Where support was required, we could see evidence in care records which showed people were supported to meet this need.

The registered manager and their staff said where they supported people with care which included meal preparation, they tried to make sure they promoted and healthy, balanced and nutritious diet as well as encouraging people to have sufficient fluids. Staff said that where they felt people need a referral for a health matter, this was discussed with office based staff.

Care and support plans contained details of health professionals involved in people’s care and support and the reasons why. There was clear guidance in place where particular health conditions, such as diabetes. needed to be understood.

People and relatives confirmed they received satisfaction surveys and telephone monitoring checks to ask about the quality of care provided. The registered manager used this information to improve outcomes for people.

Staff told us they could raise concerns about people’s care and support at any time. They said they knew people well and because they attended the same care calls, there was continuity to be able to notice if a person was not their usual self, or if there was a concern. Welfare discussions were taking place at meetings where staff could raise any concerns and talk about what improvements can be made to improve outcomes for people.

Records of telephone monitoring showed these checks were completed monthly, and where there was evidence of unsuccessful contact, further attempts were recorded until successful. Welfare discussions were taking place at staff meetings.

People and relatives told us staff asked for their consent before commencing providing care.

The registered manager said they had improved the recording of capacity and consent. Regarding obtaining consent from people, a staff member told us, "We always ask how a person wants their care to be done. They often have a routine, but that doesn’t mean it’s the same every day. They might change their mind."

Capacity and consent was documented in care plans and there was evidence of best interests meetings where necessary. Power of Attorney records had been obtained and written into care records.