Bkind 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 service met people's needs. At the last assessment this was rated good. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant people's needs were not always met.

People were not always consulted on how they would like to receive their care, systems and processes at the service were no always followed and care plans were not given to people.

This service scored 32 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People did not always feel consulted about their care following the initial assessment meeting. People felt they had choice and control over their care and they largely received person centred care.

Staff knew people well and they told us they had access to the information they needed to provide the right care. One member of staff told us, “The care plans are good. I follow them and do what they say.” However, we found the care plan was basic and lacking in any person-centred information.

People told us they had a positive experience returning from hospital to have support from the service. One person told us, “I was in hospital earlier this year. I asked for the same staff back. I am ok with them.”

The nominated individual worked across health provisions to ensure people received the care they needed. We observed the nominated individual liaising with hospitals, GPs and commissioners throughout our assessment.

We did not receive any feedback from partners.

The nominated individual had established good links with commissioners, pharmacies, GPs and the hospital to support people access health and social care. However, care recorded did not consistently evidence the input from health and social care professionals to manage known risks people experienced.

People told us they did not receive information on their care. One person told us, “The carers don’t call if they are late, even if they are very late. It would be helpful if this does happen.” People told us they did not have a copy of their care plan and they had not seen it.

Staff told us they kept people up to date of changes to their care and they work closely with leaders to share information and updates.

People’s care plans were not always kept up to date and they contained out of date information. For example, when someone had fallen, this was not updated to tell staff there had been a change. Therefore, there was no ongoing monitoring or management plan in place to minimise the risk of the same incident happening again.

People did not always know who the leaders were and did not feel listened to. The feedback we had was mixed. One person told us, “I’ve not got a clue who the manager is.” Another person said “I don’t believe I know the manager.” Some people did know the leaders but were unclear that the nominated individual was not the registered manager and how to give feedback on their care.

Staff told us they spoke to people regularly and people were able to provide feedback on the care given. However, people and relative’s we spoke to told us they had not had an opportunity to share feedback on the care given.

People were not invited to give feedback on their experience of care. There was no record that there were phone calls to seek feedback from people. Visits to people to review their care and seek feedback were not consistently and robustly completed. While concerns and complaints were recorded, these were within the accidents and incidents record. Complaints and concerns were not followed up robustly. For example, one person complained about the time of their visit. It was noted they would be visited the following week to review this but there was no record of this taking place. It was also unclear from records if the time had been changed.

Following the inspection, the provider told us as well as sending feedback forms, they also intend to visit people to seek their views on their experience of care.

Most people and relatives told us they had access to all the services they needed.

The nominated individual told us they held regular virtual staff team meetings to ensure people received the right care and any concerns were acted upon.

We did not receive any feedback from partners.

Systems and processes were not robustly followed to ensure there was equity for people’s experiences. While the provider did have staff team meetings, these did not include updated on changes and improvements which needed to be made, action plans with dates by which improvements needed to made by and celebrate when improvement actions had been made. While the provider had care plans in place for people, these were not always accurate and kept up to date.

Most people and relatives told us they had access to the services they needed.

The nominated individual told us they held regular virtual staff team meetings to ensure people received the right care and any concerns were acted upon.

Systems and processes were not robustly followed to ensure there was equity for people’s experiences. While the provider did have staff team meetings, these did not include updates on changes and improvements which needed to be made, action plans with dates by which improvements needed to made by and celebrate when improvement actions had been made. While the provider had care plans in place for people, these were not always accurate and kept up to date.

People did not share any feedback in relation to their end of life experience of care. People’s care plans did not include information on end of life care.

Staff had received training on end of life care however with the absence of guidance from care plans, we could not be assured staff would know how to use their training.

We found no evidence of any end of life care discussions taking place or end of life care plans or documentation outlining the person's wishes if they suddenly became unwell. For example, who to contact or whether the person would want medical assistance.