ELY DIOCESAN ASSOCIATION FOR DEAF PEOPLE (Cambridgeshire Deaf Association)

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

People received person-centred care and support from a core staff team that knew them well. People were supported by staff to spend time doing things they enjoyed, this included working towards goals. Information was provided to people, their relatives and staff in their preferred format, and the communication systems at the service also supported this. Staff understood how poor communication, or communication which did not meet the needs of people, could have a poor outcome. Concerns and complaints were reviewed by the most appropriate person, and the providers procedures were followed.

This service scored 89 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

People we spoke with did not raise any concerns in relation to the information they received, and how they received it. During the assessment process, 1 person requested that ‘planned staffing information’ was provided in a different way, and the registered manager ensured this took place.

People told us communication aids and pictorial boards were implemented based upon their own needs and wishes. And furthermore, these could be adapted if required.

Staff told us information relating to people, and safe working policies, were readily available to them. Staff told us information was shared with them in a way they understood, and further demonstrated how they would find information using the providers electronic systems. Staff told us of the communication barriers faced by deaf people, and how they themselves, and people, were supported by specific assistive technology, such as motion sensitive devices, and silent alarms which vibrate.

The provider used electronic care plan systems, which included text care plans and specific programmes to allow for visual recordings to incorporate British Sign Language. This meant records met the specific communication needs of people and staff. The provider communicated with people and staff in a variety of ways. This included video calls with British Sign Language, recording videos and sending them via electronic devices, and text messages and recordings. Furthermore, where people required pictorial communication, this was provided.

People and their relatives told us they knew who to talk to if they wanted to make comments or raise concerns. People told us staff were responsive to their communication, and they felt involved in all aspects of their support, which included the planning of, and specific delivery.

People told us they were confident to escalate concerns to the management team if needed. For example, 1 person said, “If I have problems, I will tell staff. They will help me.”

Staff were responsive to the needs of people, and respected and supported people to communicate their feelings. The registered manager understood their responsibility to ensure concerns and complaints were reviewed and responded to in a timely manner.

Processes in place supported people to share their views about the service and the support they received. The provider sought feedback from people in a way which met their communication needs.

The registered manager used feedback from people, relatives and staff to review and improve the service provided. Staff meetings, and the presence and availability of management ensured staff were supported to communicate freely. A thorough complaints process and policy was in place which ensured complaints and concerns were escalated to, and reviewed by, the most appropriate person.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

People were supported by staff to access a wide range of services. People told us staff provided the specific support they required, and where needed, additional advocacy support would be arranged. People told us staff supported them to access and take part in a range of activities, education and experiences. People also told us staff supported them to attend medical and social appointments.

People were supported by specific staff teams, this meant staff knew people well and were able to provide effective support to ensure people had access to the health and social care support, hobbies, activities and education of their choosing. Staff arranged for people to have access to independent advocates, where necessary, which ensured people had appropriate equity in experiences and outcomes regarding their health and wellbeing.

Processes in place ensured people were supported with their social, medical and healthcare needs. Care plans identified the specific communication support needs of people, and staff understood these needs, and ensured effective support was provided which was underpinned by the providers processes. The registered manager was passionate to ensure people had fair access to services, opportunities and experiences.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.