Golden World Care Service

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

Based on the findings of this assessment we found the service had improved and addressed all the outstanding breaches we identified at their last inspection. We have therefore changed the providers rating for this key question from requires improvement to good. This was because at this assessment we found the provider had followed the action plan we required them to send us after their last inspection and had improved peoples care and risk management plans to make them person-centred. In addition, staff continued to effectively communicate and share information with people in a way they could easily understand, treat people fairly and help them understand their equality and human rights.

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 told us the personal care they received from staff who supported them was always person-centred. For example, people said staff treated them as individuals and knew what they liked to do and what they did not. A person said, “Yes, I do have a care plan that reflects what I need doing.” A relative added, “My [family member] does have a care plan which does say what staff have agreed to do for my [family member], and they [staff] do what they say they will.”

Managers and staff told us peoples care plans had been improved and were now far more person-centred and sufficiently detailed which enabled to them to meet a person’s needs in accordance with their expressed wishes and preferences. Care plans now included up to date and detailed guidance for staff which made it clear how people preferred their personal care needs to be met. For example, if people preferred to receive their personal care from female only staff this was now included in their care plan. A member of staff said, “Care plans are person-centred and they have all the information I need to know how to look after the people I support properly.” Another member of staff added, “Yes, peoples care plans are detailed and provide clear guidance on how to meet their specific needs. They cover all aspects of care, including their preferences and daily routines.” Care staff demonstrated good awareness of people’s individual support needs and preferences.

People told us they received person-centred care from staff who were familiar with their individual care needs, preferences and daily routines.

Staff were familiar with the personalised care, preferences and daily routines of the people they regularly supported. A member of staff said, “In cases where there are any changes to a client’s needs, the office managers come out to review the person’s care plan with them and update it so staff have all the correct information we need to continue meeting that individual’s needs.”

External health and social care professionals expressed being generally satisfied with the person-centred care their clients received from this provider.

People’s care plans were up to date, personalised and contained detailed information about their unique strengths, likes and dislikes, and how they preferred staff to meet their personal care needs and wishes. Staff were committed to reviewing people’s care and support on an ongoing basis. Care plan reviews took place at regular intervals or as and when required if people’s needs and wishes changed.

People told us the provider supplied them with all the information they needed to know in easy to read and understand formats about how their personal care needs were to be met.

Managers and staff confirmed they could supply people with information about the service in accessible formats as and when this was requested.

The provider had systems in place that enabled them to supply people with information about the service in accessible formats as and when required. For example, the service users guide, and the providers complaints procedure could be made available in a variety of different formats, including large print, audio and different language versions. Peoples communication needs and preferred method of communication was clearly highlighted in their personalised care plan.

People told us the provider routinely sought their views about the service they received. People, and those important to them, also said they were able to take part in making decisions and planning of their care. A person said, “Staff from the office often phone me to see how I am, which is nice, and will visit me at home if things change for me.” A relative added, “Mangers come to review my [family members] care plan. The provider also has a survey they ask me to fill out sometimes.”

The provider valued and listened to the views of staff. Staff were encouraged to contribute their ideas about what the service did well and what they could do better. This included regular individual meetings with the office-based managers and in-person observations of their working practises during care visits conducted by their supervisors. They also had regular opportunities to participate in the providers staff survey. People also said they were able to express their views and engaged in making decisions about the personal care they received. People, and those important to them, took part in making decisions and planning of the personal care package they received.

The provider promoted an open and inclusive culture which regularly sought the views of people they supported and encouraged them to actively get involved in making informed decisions about the service they received. They used a range of methods to gather people’s views about the service and check their wellbeing. This included regular welfare check telephone calls and in-person home visits conducted by the office-based managers and senior staff. People also had the opportunity to participate in the providers own customer satisfaction surveys.

People could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Staff understood people had a right to receive the care and support that met their specific individual needs.

External health and social care professionals told us the provider made sure their clients could access the care and support they needed when they needed it.

People received care and support from staff according to their individual assessed needs and wishes. People had access to external health care and social care professionals as and when needed.

People were provided with the care and support they wanted based on their specific needs. People were engaged and supported by staff to be included and have the same opportunity as others to receive the care and support of their choice.

Staff understood people had a right to be treated equally and fairly, to receive care and support that met their specific needs. Staff understood about people’s cultural heritage and spiritual needs and how to protect people from discriminatory behaviours and practices. Managers confirmed they ensured people who requested to have gender specific care staff to provide their personal care was met. A member of staff said, “They [the provider] do their best to match carers with clients based on gender preferences, language, and cultural understanding, which helps to improve the quality of care we can provide our clients.” Another member of staff added, “My employers do try to match us with the clients based on our varying skillsets, character and importantly the client's preferences.”

People’s care plans contained detailed information about their individual wishes and preference’s in relation to how their social, cultural and spiritual needs should be met. This meant staff now had access to information about how people should be supported with their specific cultural and spiritual needs and wishes. Staff received equality and diversity training to help them make sure people were not subjected to discriminatory behaviours and practices.

At the time of our assessment, the provider was not supporting anyone receiving end of life care.

Staff had received end of life care training.

People’s care plans had a section where their end of life care and support needs and wishes could be recorded. People also had ‘Do not resuscitate’ information recorded in their care plans, that staff were made aware of.