Rynes Healthcare Ltd

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 by staff to access care and support from relevant professionals. Staff supported some people to access their local community. The provider complied with the Accessible Information Standard by identifying, recording, flagging, sharing and meeting the information and communication needs of people with a disability or sensory loss. People using the service and their relatives were able to share feedback about their care and told us it was acted upon by staff.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Relatives told us people’s needs were met in a personalised way. They said the registered manager was responsive and adapted care plans when needed.

Staff told us they supported people to make choices so they could be at the centre of their care and support.

Some people were supported by staff to access services and amenities in their local community. People’s relatives told us they were happy with the support their family members received in this aspect of their care.

Staff said they took time to understand people’s needs so they could access services in their local area. One member of staff told us, “I go with [person] to do her shopping and I walk by her side so that she is stable because her mobility is not so good”.

We did not receive any feedback from partners about this topic.

The provider's processes helped ensure people’s care was delivered in a way that met their assessed needs, including those with protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.

People’s relatives told us staff ensured people received information in ways they could understand.

Staff gave examples of how they ensured effective communication with people. One member of staff told us, “If they use hearing aids, I make sure they are wearing them”. Another member of staff said, “When I am communicating with a person who is not hearing well, I take my time, don’t rush. I tend to kneel down to the level they are at”.

Assessments recorded people’s communication needs and any equipment or adaptations they needed to ensure they understood information about their care.

People’s relatives told us they were able to share feedback about people’s care and that it was acted upon by staff.

Staff told us they used feedback forms to support people to express their views about the care and support provided. In addition, they encouraged people to raise any queries or concerns directly to them so they could report to their manager.

People were able to give their views about the service and the care they received through questionnaires and telephone monitoring calls.

People were able to access care, treatment and support when they needed to and in a way which promoted equality and protected their rights.

Staff provided examples of how they supported people to access care and support when they needed it. One member of staff told us that they had contacted healthcare professionals when a person became unwell, ensuring they followed appropriate procedures to ensure the person received the treatment they needed.

We did not receive any feedback from partners about this topic.

The provider’s processes helped ensure people had equal access to care and support, including considering the needs of people with different protected characteristics and making reasonable adjustments.

People’s relatives told us their family members’ care and support was well co-ordinated and that they were involved in planning their family members’ care.

Staff gave examples of how they advocated for people to help ensure good outcomes for them. one member of staff told us, “I would involve the family first, then we talk to the medical professional; he or she could have more details of the medical history and what is expected”.

The provider’s policies and procedures helped ensure compliance with legal equality and human rights requirements, including having regard to the needs of people with different protected characteristics.

Relatives told us they had discussed the care people would wish to receive towards the end of their lives. One relative said, “We had a chat about a DNR and we agreed that we would want a DNR in place. I am going to speak to the GP about this.” A DNACPR [Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation] is an advance decision to specify whether a person should receive CPR if their heart or breathing stops.

Staff told us they had not attended training in the provision of end of life care. Although the service was not providing end of life care at the time of our assessment, we recommend the provider make training in this aspect of care available for staff to equip them to support people towards the end of their lives.

We recommend the provider improve the quality of information recorded regarding people’s wishes about the care they wished to receive towards the end of their lives. The care plan format used by the provider included a section titled, ‘End of life care preferences’. The care plans we checked did not capture enough information to ensure people’s wishes were known. For example, this section in one person’s care plan stated, ‘End of life arrangements must be discussed and part of my future care plan’, and included the objective, ‘To maintain my end of life wishes.’ However, the care plan contained no further information.