Mitcham

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 newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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.

People’s care plans were clear about the importance of staff communication and engaging them in conversations about the things that mattered to them. Staff described the importance of developing good relationships with the people they supported and being vigilant to any signs that a person’s needs may be changing. People’s relatives told us the service was responsive in addressing any changes in needs, and that they were involved in discussions and decisions about change.

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’s assessments included information about their health and care needs and staff engaged with other professionals involved in their care and support, where appropriate. The provider was knowledgeable about people’s cultural and faith communities. Staff ensured care and support was provided to meet people’s cultural, religious and other needs and preferences.

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

People’s relatives told us they received the information they required in a timely manner. People’s care plans and risk assessments were clear and easy to understand. People were matched with staff who spoke their first language where they requested this. The registered manager told us that, at the time of our inspection, no one required written information in other formats or languages. However, they would ensure information was tailored to people’s communication needs should this be required in future.

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.

The provider had systems in place for handling feedback and complaints. People’s relatives told us they were aware of the provider’s complaints procedure. They knew they could contact the registered manager at any time. They confirmed people were involved in making decisions about their care and any changes to their care plans.

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

People were enabled to choose and agree the times they wished the service to provide care, and to decide how they wished their care to be delivered. They were aware that they could request changes to their care and support at any time.

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 care plans included information about their cultural, religious, social and other diversity needs. Guidance for staff was included to ensure the care and support they provided was respectful of people’s individual needs and preferences. Staff had received equality and diversity training. The provider’s equality and diversity policies and procedures reflected current best practice.

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 care plans included information about their end of life wishes. The registered manager told us people’s families would take care of people’s end of life arrangements, and this was reflected in their plans. The service was not supporting people nearing the end of life at the time of our inspection. However, the registered manager told us the service would provide any necessary support to people and their families if required, including liaison with palliative care and other relevant health professionals.