Gill Care Services

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Care plans and assessments had been developed with the involvement of people and relatives. Staff told us they had access to these. Not all care plans and risk assessments in relation to individual medical needs were developed until the assessment. People were supported to access relevant professionals as required. Evidence of working with professionals was seen. People had agreed to their care and consents had been obtained, the provider took action to ensure where capacity assessments were required, these were 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 and relatives told us they had been involved in their assessments, and reviews were taking place. They said, “We had an initial meeting at the hospital. Someone from the agency came to our home before [person using the service]was discharged. They contact us by phone regularly for a review. I have regular contact with team leader and [registered] manager” and, “Boss (Registered manager) came last week to find out how things are going. They call or come out every few months.”

Staff told us they had access to care plans and assessments, they were informed when these changed and had read them. They told us, “I have access to care plans, they’re on 1 plan (Electronic care records), I can access this on my phone”, “We get updates about peoples care and needs. If they change anything in their care plan they (The management) would let us know” and, “Care plans are available in each person’s home, they are in a file and we get time to read them.” The registered manager said they had developed the care plans to ensure they were detailed and supported the needs of people.

People had up to date care plans. These were held in people’s homes with a copy in the office. Archived records were returned to the office and these were checked by the management when they were returned. Evidence reviews had been completed was seen. We saw some records which required updating to reflect all of their individual needs. We addressed this with the registered manager who took immediate action to ensure these were in place, and confirmed all records had relevant care plans and risk assessments in place. Staff told us and we saw daily records had been completed on the electronic system 1 plan. This meant these could be monitored by the management team.

Relatives told us the staff team linked in with professionals if required. One said “If the carers (staff) are here they liase. The [professional] comes as well. The carer will liase with them if needed.”

Staff knew about people’s individual needs and where to access the information about how to support them, including support with food and fluids if this was part of their support needs. One told us, “I will ask them and it is written in their care plan. Staff told us they had completed relevant training, including specific training to support people’s needs. An example of this was, all staff had undertaken PEG (tube feeding) feeding and understanding epilepsy training.

Nutritional assessments had been completed and we saw records confirming professionals had been involved in people’s care. Where required food and fluids records were in place.

Relatives said the staff and management linked in with professionals involved in their family members care. Comments included, “The [Health professional] comes out every week. The carer will liaise with them if needed” and, “I do all the coordinating. If the carers notice anything with [Persons] [Condition] skin, they will show [Person].”

Staff told us regular team meetings were taking place and updates in relation to people and the service were shared with them. Staff told us, “I will read notes on 1 plan, it will say it all on there, if someone has had their medicines or eaten well” and, “We have to be aware of what is going on, we have handovers and talk to each other. If I need anything, I will call another staff member, we all help each other. We are a good team.”

Professionals provided positive feedback about the service and confirmed updates and feedback about people and their needs was provided, as needed.

Records of team meetings had been completed. These included information and updates on people’s needs to share with the staff team. The management team provided evidence of sharing updates with professionals involved in people’s care.

People and relatives told us they were supported to manage their individual health needs. One told us, “They (The staff) will suggest to us if she needs to see the GP or DN (District Nurse) and I will call them.”

Staff knew what to do to support healthier lives for people. They told us they would involve relevant professionals if people’s needs changed. Comments included, “I would tell the family and the [registered] manager. If it was serious I would ring 111 or an ambulance” and, “I would tell the [registered] manager straight away.”

Care records included person centered information about how to support their individual needs. However, some people’s individual health needs had no care plans and risk assessment to support their management. The provider took immediate action to address this during the assessment and gave assurance that the records for all people had been checked and relevant information was in place.

People were positive about the care staff provided and reviews about their care were undertaken, as required. Comments included, “They did (A review) in [Month]. Every couple of months they will phone” and, “We have had some reviews.”

Staff understood it was important to respect people’s choices. However, they fedback that they encourage eating well and healthy options. One staff member told us, “We encourage them to eat well and be healthy. But this is their choices.”

Not all people’s induvial risk assessments had been completed for specific health conditions. The management took immediate action and ensured a risk assessment was developed for one person who had a medical condition. Records were person centred and supported the care people required.

People and relatives told us staff communicate with people and had consented to their care. One told us, “They do all the care, they already have our permission and we are happy with what they do.”

Staff told us they always sought consent before undertaking any care or activity. They said they would protect people’s wishes and support them. Comments included, “I always get consent with everything I do. This is important”, “This is the main thing; you have to ask for consent and make sure they feel comfortable” and, “I would protect their wishes. I would tell them I am here to look after them and make them comfortable. If they don’t want my help, I would make notes but I would have to try first.”

Care records included information which confirmed consent had been obtained in a number of areas. Them management team discussed the needs of one person in relation to Mental capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty safeguards (DoLS) however, this was not reflected in their care record. They provided evidence that agreements were in place and took immediate action to ensure care plans and risk assessments were in place to reflect all people’s needs. Staff had undertaken training in MCA and DoLS. People had access to advocacy services if this was required.