Rainbow Living

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

Staff provided people with personalised, proactive and co-ordinated support in line with their care plans. This included a clear focus on their communication plans and positive behaviour support plans. These were regularly reviewed and updated in response to changes to people’s needs. People, and those important to them, could raise concerns and complaints easily and staff supported them to do so. The service treated all concerns and complaints seriously, investigated them and learned lessons from the results, sharing the learning with the whole team and the wider service where appropriate. Staff were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage different groups of people using their services. They proactively supported people to remove any barriers to care and to support access to healthcare.

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.

We visited 3 supported living projects and engaged with 6 people. We were able to speak with 1 person specifically about person-centred care; they told us they were happy with their care and felt content. We spoke with 1 person at Merton House who was able to confirm their one-page profile in their care plan accurately reflected what was important to them. The Expert by Experience contacted people by phone and spoke with 4 people and 5 family members. They received 4 responses from families; 2 were very clear that care was person-centred and 2 were less clear in their answers, but did not raise concerns.

The registered manager shared a number of examples of team meetings focused solely on the care of 1 person attended by all staff involved in their care. These took place quarterly for each person and helped to ensure care was responsive and person-centred. We spoke with 8 support workers on-site who confirmed care was person-centred and gave examples.

During our visits to 3 supported living projects we observed good interactions between people and staff. Staff were warm and attentive when they engaged with people and all 3 projects were calm and had enough staff.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We visited 3 supported living projects and engaged with 6 people. We were able to speak with 2 people about communication and if they felt they were listened to. One person had an advocate arranged by the service manager and the other person said the service manager was just a text away and was easy to contact if they had concerns. The Expert by Experience contacted people by phone and spoke with 4 people and 5 family members. They were asked about communication including being listened to and the complaints process. The feedback was mostly positive.

A checklist was completed with the registered manager in relation to communication with people and their families including a discussion about the complaints process. Clear systems were in place. A new electronic care planning system was being introduced, giving families access to care plans in future where consent was provided to do so; this would increase their involvement. The complaint tracking matrix recorded 3 formal complaints in a 12-month period. Each was investigated, and the tracker recorded any actions taken and any lessons learned. Provider oversight was also recorded. The tracker also recorded 26 compliments recorded over the same period.

There were clear processes in place to deal with complaints both internally and externally. There was an open and transparent culture supported by a Duty of Candour policy. Templates for gathering feedback from external partners such as families and health and social care professionals were in place but had not been collected recently. The registered manager said these would be included in future plans moving forward.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We visited 3 supported living projects and engaged with 6 people. We were able to speak with 2 people specifically about any barriers to care they experienced; they reported no concerns. The Expert by Experience contacted people by phone and spoke with 4 people and 5 family members; no concerns were reported about any barriers to care or any discrimination.

The registered manager was not aware of any barriers to care experienced by people using the service. The registered manager identified an example where family had been a concern and this had been dealt with by raising a safeguarding. Staff induction and training covered the issue of barriers to care to make sure staff were able to support people if a barrier did arise. We engaged with 6 support workers on-site about this issue and none had come across any barriers to care.

Staff received equality and diversity training, and given the majority of staff were recruited from overseas, there was a clear focus on this issue to help staff understand the context and to give them an understanding of the context in which they would work. An equality & diversity policy provided guidance to staff, including protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. All the care plans we looked at provided the opportunity for people to share what was important to them if they chose to.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.