Yourlife (Swindon)

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

We reviewed 7 quality statements relating to person-centred care, care provision, integration and continuity, providing information, listening to and involving people, equity in access, equity in experiences and outcomes, and planning for the future. We found staff and leaders worked with other partners to make sure people’s needs were met. People could have access to information suitable for them and there were policies to support this. Information was provided to people on how to make a complaint. Staff and leaders were aware of the need to ensure fair and equal treatment to everyone and there were policies to support this. Staff had received training in equality, diversity and inclusion.

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 their care and support plans reflected what they expected from the service. These plans were personal to them and contained information for staff on how they wished to be supported. 

Staff told us care plans were written by management and agreed with people and their relatives. They described how they would follow the care plans and adapt things on the day based on people’s wishes. They would let management know of any changes so a discussion could take place with people to ensure care plans reflected their needs.

People lived within their own homes as part of a housing development. People told us there was a sense of community within the development and staff were always available to help with any concerns they had. One person told us they had needed support to attend a hospital appointment, so the service had arranged for a taxi and staff member to go with them.

Staff and leaders told us how they worked with other agencies to make sure people’s needs were met.

One partner agency told us the service worked well with them to help identify any concerns for a person they were supporting. They told us “When I shared my concern about a person, they had recently identified the same concern, and we formulated a plan.”

There was evidence of referrals and communication with relevant agencies on behalf of people who were supported by the service. People’s care records demonstrated the service had worked with other care providers and health services to ensure people received continuity of care.

People did not raise any concerns about the way they received information from the provider. One person told us how staff had adapted to their communication needs due to a diagnosis.

Staff showed an understanding of how to adapt their communication needs for people. One staff member told us “I support someone with Parkinson’s who struggles to get their words out, it’s about being patient and allowing time to answer” and “making sure you understand if someone needs something verbally or written down, showing people objects and things to help them process.”

The provider had an Accessible Information Standards (AIS) policy in place and people's communication needs were documented in care plans. People had also copies of their care plans and documentation located in their homes.

People told us they knew how to raise a concern. Where concerns had been raised, people told us they were satisfied with the response and outcome.

Leaders told us they were responsive to people providing comments and completed 6 monthly feedback surveys with people and relatives. People were also encouraged to raise concerns directly with staff or management. There was another option for people to raise concerns directly through the provider’s customer contact centre.

The provider had a complaints policy and a process in place to manage complaints. People had access to the providers complaint policy which was in their homes. The provider had not received any written complaints since the service commenced.

People told us they were supported to access the services they needed. They told us the provider amended care visits if they needed to attend other appointments.

Staff told us people had access to the support they needed. This could be from office staff, family or other professionals they needed access to, such as the GP.

Partners did not raise any concerns about the way the service ensured equity in access for people. One partner agency told us “The service allows people to have the support when they need it. My clients told me there has been flexibility with support if they needed it. If my client needs additional help, then I’m sure they would assist.”

The service had an effective process in place to ensure people could access what they needed. We saw examples of where the provider had taken steps to ensure people had access to the equipment and services needed.

Everyone we spoke with felt they were treated fairly and equally by the provider and the staff supporting them. 

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Everyone had their specific protected characteristics recorded and these were known and respected by the staff supporting them.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Staff were aware of people’s plans for the future and where and how to access the information.

There was information available in care plans regarding people’s wishes for the future. Where people did not wish the service to help them plan for the future, this was respected and appropriately documented.