Wakefield Supported Living

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 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 were supported to develop their own care and support plans with support from staff. These were reviewed and updated regularly, when people achieved goals and when their needs or aspirations changed. People were involved in reviews of their care and relatives and professionals were invited to take part where appropriate. Staff were observed to support people with dignity and respect, and in line with agreed plans of care.

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 were in control over who came into their home. The provider was mindful of people’s personalities and needs when considering new people moving in and took steps to ensure that people got on before any direct transition planning took place. Systems and processes were in place to ensure that information was shared with internal and external health and social care professionals. Professionals told us the provider worked well with them, sharing information promptly and commented that they have observed staff delivering support in line with agreed plans.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People were able to access health and social care professionals where needed and information from these appointments was recorded accurately within peoples plans. People’s relatives told us that if accidents or incidents had occurred, the provider kept them informed.

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 policies and processes in place for people, their relatives and staff to share their feedback about the service. People’s care plans were regularly reviewed and updated as people’s needs and preferences changed. Relatives could receive updates through a variety of formats including phone calls, text messages or access to online plans subject to consent.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff understood the needs of autistic people and people with a learning disability and worked to ensure that potential barriers faced by people were removed or mitigated against. Examples included supporting people to access opportunities in the community, access to holidays and supporting people to access health and social care services.

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 had access to support and equipment to ensure they were able to take part in activities of their choosing through the day. People were able to state their preferences for how they wanted to be supported. People had access to relatives or advocates who could support them to exercise their rights, and the provider supported people to manage their tenancies and request repairs and improvements where needed.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future. Some people and their relatives did not want to discuss end of life planning. Where this was the case, the provider had documented the decision and had established what steps would be taken if there was an emergency, and who to contact. The provider had made plans to revisit the subject in the future.