Way Ahead Care LTD

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 at their new registered address. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

People were supported to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Changes to people’s care were incorporated into their care plans and shared with staff so they had the most up to date information on how to support each person.

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 management team and staff made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they made decisions about their care.

The provider’s mandatory training included personal care, person centred care, recording people’s consent, their wishes, needs and wants and involving people in their care.

People were supported, where able, to consent to their care. Staff spoke positively about the people in their care and the importance of having meaningful, supportive relationships with them.

Staff undertook an initial assessment of people they supported. This included the person and their relatives when appropriate. People discussed the outcomes they wanted regarding areas like their health, wellbeing, mobility and nutrition. This was reviewed during the yearly reviews and more frequently if things changed.

The management team and staff understood the diverse health and care needs of people, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice. They worked hard to fully understand the preferences of people they supported.

The provider’s support team supported people to attend a range of medical appointments and records were kept, detailing the outcomes of each visit. One person told us, “They contacted my GP a few months ago for me as I had a chest infection. They are on the ball about anything like that.”

The management team and staff worked well with the local authority and other professionals including GP's, district nurses and social workers in order to support people’s needs.

The registered manager, told us, “We have a support service to allow for our service users to access their local communities. We have recently supported a service user to go on a trip to the beach, another service user to join a skittles club over the weekend, and supported with an individual moving house.”

The management team and staff supplied information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. For example, the quarterly newsletter had a QR code so people who were visually impaired could listen to the content. The provider’s survey had been adapted so people could have it in a format to suit them.

People received a rota telling them who was providing their support. When there were changes made to the rota, the provider had a system where people were called to ensure they were made aware.

The registered manager told us, “If we identify an individual with a need that is individual to them, we would explore communication options for them, which may include braille, sign language, electronics and use of electronic communication systems.”

The management team and staff supported people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. People were invited to monthly meetings where they were kept informed and could raise any concerns.

The provider had a ‘user feedback charter’ in their extra care housing schemes to seek the views of people they supported. They also ensured people had a service user guide when they started using the service, with the complaints procedure to guide them.

People confirmed they had been able to give feedback to the provider. Comments included, “I have done a couple of feedback forms this year, but nothing needs changing. Management are easy to talk with. All I can say is they are all brilliant”, “I do a feedback form every few months, I think. I don’t know of anything has actually changed as a result of what I have written” and “I think that I fill in a feedback form about every 6 months. There are not really any changes needed as a result of what I write. My only complaint has been that sometimes they come too early but when I tell the office they are helpful and change it for me. Management are very helpful whenever I have had anything to do with them.”

The management team and staff supported people to access the care and support they needed. Within the extra care schemes, there were staff on site to respond to people’s individual needs. The provider had an out of hours service, for support in the evenings, and a manager on call overnight for emergencies in the service. A staff member told us, “Coordinators on the other end of the phone. Weekends and evenings are trickier when OOH [out of hours] is covered by Somerset Care. My colleagues are very supportive.” A relative, told us, “They are always very pleasant in the office when I ring. I do speak to them quite a lot. They are easy to communicate with.”

The management team undertook a call bell audit, to monitor that pendant alarms were responded to appropriately and in good time.

The management team and staff had developed a good working relationship with local authorities and health professionals, which helped to ensure people received access to relevant services to support good care.

People received support that reflected their wishes and preferences which led to good outcomes from their care. Staff ensured that people’s cultural, religious and personal references were identified and supported.

The registered manager told us how they supported their staff member’s cultural and personal preferences. This included how they wanted to be identified.

The provider’s training program identified if staff had any protected characteristics and supported staff to have an equal learning experience.

The management team and staff were discussing with people their future plans and, if appropriate, their end-of-life care wishes.

Staff completed different levels of end-of-life training, which was based on the gold standards framework (an evidence-based end of life care service improvement programme), so they had the skills to support people if required.

Staff had access to the provider’s policies to guide them.