Diversity Health and Social Care Limited

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

People’s needs and rights were supported. People’s care and treatment was effective due to their health, care, well-being, and communication needs being assessed with them. People’s care plans were kept up to date with any assessments completed in a timely manner. Staff were aware of people’s preferences and respected these in a person-centred way.

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 involved in decisions about their care. Care plans were signed by people to ensure they agreed with the support they received. Overall, people and relatives told us they had been involved in planning their care. One relative said, “The care plan was done with me and [person].”

Staff we spoke with were clear about the need to be timely and support people in line with their plan of care. Staff gave good examples of people living with high-risk needs, for example, catheters, PEG feeding, skin management requirements and people who required two staff for moving and handling needs.

The provider ensured that pre-admission assessments of people’s needs had been completed prior to admission. These included obtaining information from people and their relatives as well as local authority about their needs and preferences and how they would like to be supported. These plans reflected people’s needs, including aspects of their life which were important to them. For example, catheters and PEG feeding. Plans in place gave clear guidance for staff to follow. Staff had an electronic system where care plans and records were stored. This meant the management team and staff had access to up-to-date information on the day-to-day support people received.

People and their relatives made comments about the quality of the food provided. One person said, “They do help with food in the evening because I can’t physically cook by myself, but I direct them.” A relative said, "I do all the meals, but the carers do help feed [person] at breakfast, and they are very good.”

Staff were aware of the people who needed a specialised diet and/or soft diet to ensure their needs were met. One staff member said, “For breakfast and lunch, I will ask [person] what they like to eat of. Also, speak to family member if they made food for [person].” Another staff member said, “Yes, we take our time and check and be careful with what food we are giving. We wait them for finish meal, wash up and make sure environment is ok before leaving.”

People were assisted to have enough to eat and drink where this was part of their care needs. Care plans included people's support they may require with meals. Staff were trained in food hygiene.

Where necessary, the service worked with other services to deliver effective care and support. People told us they were able to see their doctor, dentist, or optician whenever they needed to. Records we looked at confirmed this.

Staff received regular supervision and there were staff meetings which covered priorities such as updates on people health conditions, training, PPE, and safeguarding. Records confirmed that staff had regular team meetings that allowed them the opportunity to input suggestions regarding the service.

We received feedback from partners. The local authority shared about the quality of care and safety of people using the service and has no concerns with Diversity Health and Social Care Ltd.

Staff shared information with each other during the day about people's daily personal care. Staff also kept notes regarding health concerns for people and action taken. This enabled staff to monitor people's health and ensure they accessed health and social care services when required. These care notes were regularly reviewed by management to check that people were being seen by appropriate professionals in a timely way.

People told us they were able to see their doctor, dentist, or optician whenever they needed to. One relative said, “The regular carer picked up the beginnings of a pressure sore and the agency contacted the district nurse who came out. “

The service recorded relevant information about people’s care in daily notes. Staff could access these notes and this assisted in providing effective and timely care. One staff member said, “Yes, I will contact the office if there is any concern about person, and the office will contact either GP or other health professional and they will also contact family to give them an update. The office will keep us up to date about the person.”

People were supported with their healthcare needs. Care plans and risk assessment contained information relating to different medical needs, and people’s health and wellbeing were regularly assessed. One person had complex health concerns and received support from a range of health care professionals. The provider-maintained communication with these professionals where required and followed their instruction where necessary

People and their relatives told us they were able to contact the office if they had any concerns. One relative said, “I have a number I can ring if I need too, and generally they are helpful. I can ask for anything like time changes, and they help whenever they can.” Another relative said, “The agency are flexible and helpful.”

The provider sought feedback to improve the service. People, relatives and staff were asked to complete a survey to enable the provider to learn from feedback and find ways to continuously develop the service. The registered manager told us, and people using the service confirmed that the registered manager made telephone calls to ask about the quality of service. Staff told us they were happy working at the service. Records confirmed that staff had regular team meetings that allowed them the opportunity to input suggestions regarding the service.

The provider had a robust system to monitor, assess and drive improvements to the quality of their service. The monthly audits included care plans, visit notes, medicines administration records, and, risk assessments. Where actions had been identified this informed an action plan to help make the necessary improvements. Spot checks of staff practice were completed regularly to monitor the quality of care provided to people. A complaints policy and procedure were in place. The registered manager reviewed all complaints to spot ongoing concerns and put actions in place to resolve these. Records showed a number of complaints had been received. A log was kept of complaints and a response was sent with the action being taken. Complaints had been analysed to identify potential trends and to ensure improvements can be made to the service and minimise risk of reoccurrence.

People were fully involved in decisions about their care and their capacity to do so was respected. People and their relatives told us the staff consistently sought their consent before providing any care or support. One relative said, "They [staff] always ask for our permission."

Staff told us they placed great importance on maintaining and promoting people’s independence. They were able to explain how they encouraged and supported people to be as independent as possible and to make choices. Staff understood the importance of people having the right to make their own decisions. They were aware of what to do to ensure people's rights were protected.

The provider met the requirements of the MCA. Decision specific mental capacity assessments had been carried out for people in relation to their capacity to make decisions about their care and whether they were able to give consent. The provider held best interest’s meetings for people, which involved the person, their relatives and appropriate healthcare professionals. This helped ensure the care and support provided by staff was in people's best interest. Staff had received training in the MCA and associated codes of practice and understood their responsibilities under this Act.