Sevacare - Birmingham Central

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 were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way and in their best interests: the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People's individual communication needs were considered to support them to be involved in their care. The quality of care provided was continually assessed, reviewed and improved. People using the service, relatives and staff were given the opportunity to provide feedback. People’s care plans recorded their needs for a range of areas including social needs. People told us they were involved in planning their care and helped to understand any health conditions. People talked to us about how they felt the staff knew them very well. People and relatives felt that people were treated fairly with their human rights being respected. The provider worked well with healthcare professionals to support outcomes for people. Staff received training in equality, diversity and human rights and the provider had the necessary policies in place.

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.

People were supported by staff who knew and understood their needs. People told us they had built good relationships with staff and staff were aware of their likes and dislikes. People had good links with family or advocate services and staff supported people to maintain this. Staff respected people's individuality and diversity and were aware of people's personal preferences. People and relatives were involved in the development of care plans and reviews. One relative told us, “Yes, we have a care plan it was done with me, Sevacare and [name of person] I think the hospital set it up in the first place. It`s a very good service especially as we get the same 2 people, it works very well, I don’t think they could do much more really.”

Peoples’ care plans were reviewed regularly, they remained up to date and appropriate to the individual. Changes to the care plans were communicated to staff. Staff gave us examples showing how they had contributed to people’s risk care planning for example, this where people required additional care because their mobility needs changed.

Assessments of people’s diverse needs were discussed prior to using the service. These included religion and sexuality. People told us care plans were personalised to the individual and recorded details about each person's specific needs and how they liked to be supported. People were supported to continue links with any healthcare professionals known to them. Where possible if people were regularly seeing health professionals, staff supported them to continue. One relative told us, “They (staff) have contacted district nurses and occupational therapists on our behalf and that is really reassuring us as a family.”

There were systems to help people receive a continuity in their care. People being discharged from hospital to their homes were assessed by the provider to ensure all required equipment and medicines were in place before their care package commenced. The local authority and health professionals had no concerns about the service.

The local authority health professionals had no concerns about the service.

Care plans were personalised to the individual and recorded details about each person's specific needs and how they liked to be supported. Daily notes were completed which gave an overview of the care people had received and captured any changes in people's health and well-being. Documentation could be produced in accessible formats, such as pictorial and large print for people who required this.

People told us care plans were personalised to the individual and recorded details about each person's specific needs and how they liked to be supported. People and their relatives knew how to provide feedback about their experiences of care and the service provided a range of accessible ways to do this such as regular phone calls with the management.

The provider shared examples with us of how they had produced accessible information for people. They told us they would consider the individual’s specific needs and produce communication aids and information tailored for the individual.

Daily notes were completed which gave an overview of the care people had received and captured any changes in people's health and well-being. Meeting people’s communication needs: Since 2016 all organisations that provide publicly funded adult social care are legally required to follow the Accessible Information Standard. The Accessible Information Standard tells organisations what they have to do to help ensure people with a disability or sensory loss, and in some circumstances, their carers, get information in a way they can understand it. It also says that people should get the support they need in relation to communication. Care plans contained information about people’s communication needs. Documentation could be produced in accessible formats, such as pictorial and large print for people who required this.

We saw complaints had been received, responded to and resolved in a timely manner. One person told us,” No complaints, and I can get through [management] straight away and they are always very helpful.” One relative told us, “No complaints, and when we ring the office we speak to [name of staff member], they are no problem and are very professional. [name of person] had a fall before Christmas, [staff] called an ambulance, the office [management] and stayed with him, we are very grateful. Yes, they have done a survey but no feedback as we said that we are always very happy.”

Staff told us and we saw evidence of action taken to resolve complaints and incidents in a timely manner.

Concerns and complaints were investigated and recorded. There was evidence of action taken to resolve any issues and reduce the risk of reoccurrence. Lessons learned were discussed at team meetings and individual supervision sessions to promote best practice.

People and relatives were involved in the development of care plans and reviews.

Daily notes were completed which gave an overview of the care people had received and captured any changes in people's health and well-being. This ensured all staff members were aware of any changes to people’s health conditions.

Feedback collected by the provider from visiting professionals did not raise any concerns for this quality statement.

People were assessed before they used the service to ensure their needs and preferences were identified and could be met. Assessments of people’s diverse needs were discussed prior to using the service. These included religion and sexuality. Completed assessments were used to formulate a plan of care for each person. This provided staff with the information they needed to meet the person’s needs and preferences. People received care that was person centred and responsive to their needs. People's care records included information about their preferences and wishes to ensure support was provided in the way the person wanted. Care plans were personalised to the individual and recorded details about each person's specific needs and how they liked to be supported.

People had continuity of care, and this was personalised to their individual needs. This helped people communicate their wishes and preferences to staff who knew them very well. One relative told us, “[Name of person] wanted a female carer who spoke Punjabi, the service has met [name of person’s] needs.”

There were systems to make sure care plans and risk assessments were regularly reviewed and updated. Completed assessments were used to formulate a plan of care for each person. This provided staff with the information they needed to meet the person’s needs and preferences. Staff told us this helped them get to know people’s preferences and needs. Staff were provided with training on equality, diversity and inclusion to raise awareness of people’s rights and potential discrimination.

People were assessed before they used the service to ensure their needs and preferences were identified and could be met. Assessments of people’s diverse needs were discussed prior to using the service. These included religion and sexuality. Care plans were personalised to the individual and recorded details about each person's specific needs and how they liked to be supported.

One relative told us, “From the first day one I was asked what I wanted and how Mum’s care package should be. Sevacare have taken that on board and given me any advice if I need any.”

The manager and staff told us people and relatives were involved in the development of care plans and reviews.

People and relatives were involved in the development of care plans and reviews. Care plans were personalised to the individual and recorded details about each person's specific needs and how they liked to be supported. At the time of inspection no one was identified as needing end of life support. The provider had procedures in place to discuss people's wishes for what they wanted to happen at the end of their lives and this was recorded in their care plans.