Courage Limited

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

We assessed the following quality statements: Equity in experiences and outcomes. People were aware of how to provide feedback on the care but not all people were confident this would always be responded to. Records of complaints lacked detail to ensure these were followed up appropriately. People were provided with information in an accessible way that met their needs.

This service scored 68 (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.

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

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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 provided mixed feedback about how the provider responded to their concerns to ensure the service was meeting their needs. Some people told us it was difficult to speak with staff in the office and they had not received a response when they had raised concerns. However other people were happy with the provider’s response to concerns and said they thought the management team were open to feedback. Not all people using the service had received a regular review of their care needs. One person told us their care had been the same for 2 years and no review had taken place. Other people confirmed they had recently received a review of their needs and were involved in planning their support.

Staff told us people were given the opportunity to provide feedback about their care and preferences. One staff member said, "I believe that service users are being treated fairly and are receiving good treatment from their carers, judging from the responses they give me when I speak with them during review assessments."

Processes were in place to enable people to provide feedback on their care. However, records of complaints lacked enough detail to ensure these were followed up appropriately. Although care plans were completed with people’s input these lacked enough detail to ensure care was provided in a person-centred way. For example, information about how people wanted their personal care needs to be met was not sufficiently detailed. We saw compliments received by the service that reflected people were happy with how their cultural needs were met. Information was provided to people in an accessible format. For example, one person’s daily routine had been provided in their first language.

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.