First Choice Medical Solutions 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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery. Planning personalised care to ensure people have choice and control and to meet their needs and preferences People received support in a way that suited them by a staff team who knew them well. People’s care plans were detailed with likes and dislikes in every area of their support. Guidance was place for staff on how to support people in a personalised way. People achieved positive outcomes due to the personalised care and support they received. We found many examples where people’s well-being, behaviour and health improved due to the personalised support they received. There were various communication methods in place to support people and comply with the Accessible Information Standard. People’s communication needs were assessed, and staff had guidance how to effectively communicate with them. For example, staff used pictorial social stories to aid a person’s understanding when talking to them. Care plans gave staff clear guidance and examples of what communication people used and what this meant. This helped people feel included in their care as staff knew how to effectively communicate with them. Supporting people to develop and maintain relationships to avoid social isolation; support to follow interests and to take part in activities that are socially and culturally relevant to them. People who received support from staff in a supported living setting were engaged in different activities. Staff encouraged them to try out activities based on their hobbies and interest. Improving care quality in response to complaints or concerns. People and relatives told us they knew how to raise concerns. One relative told us they had no cause for concerns for the care their family member received.

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.

The manager and staff team made sure people were at the centre of their care and support and any choices made were done in partnership with people. The service was responsive when people's needs changed by doing a responsive review of their care plan and needs and making any required changes.

The manager talked in detail about the people, their needs, wishes and choices they had made. The wider staff team including office-based care coordinators, were able to make changes quickly and communication with care staff and team members was always shared on the same day. Regular planned reviews were scheduled. In addition, there were responsive reviews, updates when changes happened and regular quality assurance to check people needs were being met and that the care plans were still relevant.

People gave positive feedback about their care experiences. People were happy with the small team of care staff that supported them. The manager contacted them on a regular basis to make sure they remained happy with the service.

The manager and staff team made sure people were at the centre of their care and support and any choices made were done in partnership with people. The service was responsive when people's needs changed by doing a responsive review of their care plan and needs and making any required changes.

The manager talked in detail about the people, their needs, wishes and choices they had made. The wider staff team including office-based care coordinators, were able to make changes quickly and communication with care staff and team members was always shared on the same day.

Regular planned reviews were scheduled. In addition, there were responsive reviews, updates when changes happened and regular quality assurance to check people needs were being met and that the care plans were still relevant.

People told us they were happy with the way the management team and staff communicated with them. One family member told us “I like the fact they link people’s family members, so they are kept in the loop about things. We as family are always invited to share feedback.”

The service supported people to give feedback whether positive or negative and made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, and or raise complaints about their care, treatment, and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Systems and processes had been established to make sure information was current. Regular reviews, surveys and quality monitoring calls gave them an opportunity to check if there had been any changes.

Feedback from people, family, and support services, were positive about how the service operated in relation to compliance with equality legislation and anti-discriminatory practice.

Staff were aware of equality arrangements at the service as they had been trained to have a better understanding of what could constitute discrimination. Professionals and partners were positive about the service’s approach to equality and access arrangements. One partner told us “I found during the placement process that every person is treated as an individual and is given the same opportunities to live their best lives.

Systems and processes were in place to monitor equality and access and to put measure in place to address any shortfalls if identified.

People care and support was tailored to meet their individual needs, and they were very involved in establishing their care plan.

The management team had systems in place to ensure people were treated as individuals in all aspects of the service. People were informed about their rights and what action to take if they felt there was any discrimination.

Professional told us they felt the service operated an anti discriminatory policy in relation to people accessing services.

Systems and processes were in place to monitor equality in access and if for any reason a service was terminated or declined the reasons would be clearly documented

Feedback from people, family, and support services, were positive about how the service operated in relation to compliance with equality legislation and anti-discriminatory practice.

Staff were aware of equality arrangements at the service as they had been trained to have a better understanding of what could constitute discrimination. Professionals and partners were positive about the service’s approach to equality and access arrangements. One partner told us “I found during the placement process that every person is treated as an individual and is given the same opportunities to live their best lives.

Systems and processes were in place to monitor equality and access and to put measure in place to address any shortfalls if identified.

People were supported and encouraged to talk about forward planning and what they would like in the event of them becoming seriously unwell or in the event of their passing.

The manager told us talking about future wishes is often a difficult conversation. The told us they capture peoples wishes over time. Peoples end of life wishes were discussed, recorded, and reviewed regularly to make sure that the information remained current.

Systems were in place to record any advanced end of life decisions.