Gill Care Services

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 knew people’s needs and confirmed updated were shared with them in a variety of ways. People, staff and the management confirmed professionals were involved. Professionals were complimentary about the service and we saw evidence of their involvement in records. Records included information about people’s needs however, not all of the information about their health needs was recorded. Policy and guidance was in place to deal with complaints or concerns. Records of complaints were seen along with actions as a result of these. Surveys had been completed and actions recorded of the findings. The provider told us no one was in receipt of end of life care. However, we received feedback which confirmed the involvement of specialist support services. The provider gave assurances of this arrangement and provided evidence that this was recorded.

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 and relatives told us they were happy with the care they received and confirmed they were involved decisions about their care. One said, “No we have as much care as we need. They are pretty good.”

Staff told us care records contained information about how to support people’s individual needs. They said the office and management kept them informed of changes and information about people was also discussed in team meetings. They also said family members discussed updates about people’s person centred care with them. Comments included, “Families are all involved, we chat to them during the visits”, “Relatives and people are involved, we get them involved and they keep us updated with what is going on” and, “If people’s needs change we let them know and I will ask the service user, with consent. If someone needs change, the office do meetings and keep us informed of changes in meetings, on phone calls and emails.”

People and relatives told us professionals were informed and involved as required. One said, “[Professional] comes out every week. If the carers are here they liaise. The [Professional team] comes as well. The carer will liaise with them if needed.”

The management confirmed reviews of people’s care records had taken place. Staff told us they would link in with the family, the [Registered] manager and the GP if someone was unwell. They told us, “If someone wasn’t well I would monitor them and write this in my notes so the next staff can see. We can call the doctors or families” and, “If someone were unwell they would try to find out the cause and would talk with the family and if anything concerning and then consult with the GP. If there was no family I would inform the [registered] manager.”

Professionals were complementary about the service and confirmed they were engaged and involved. One told us, “Gill healthcare (Gill Care Services) have been professional, have contacted us quickly with any issues with our patients so that we can resolve them.”

Care records included information about people’s needs and reviews that had taken place. Professional assessments were seen prior to people receiving care from the service. The management team had documentation about when professionals had been involved in people’s care. One person’s record required information about assessments prior to the care package being in place in relation to medicines management, and capacity assessments. This evidence was only provided following the site visit. There was also no record about how to manage their [Medical condition]. The registered manager took immediate action to address this so that all care records included information about people’s individual needs.

People and relatives told us they were engaged and involved in their assessments and reviews. They said staff listened to them and linked in with the management team if required. One relative told us, “I do all the coordinating. [Person] has a bed bath if the carers notice anything with [Persons], they will show [Relative] and then I would call the doctor or district nurse.”

Staff understood the principles of the Accessible Information Standard and how to protect people’s privacy and keeping personal information safe. Staff discussed how to support people where they required alternative ways of communicating. One staff member told us, “Obviously the main thing is to make sure personal information is kept safe and not shared. Only people who are involved can access the records. They are kept out the way” and, “I protect their privacy and it is my responsibility to make sure their personal information is protected.

A range of up to date policies and procedures with links to relevant guidance were in place to support and guide staff in the delivery of care. These were available in the office as well as via electronic devices. The service had developed a service user guide as well as a staff hand book. These contained a range of information about the service, including contacts for people, relatives and staff to access.

People and relatives confirmed staff listened to them and they were included in discussions about people’s needs. People told us they knew how to raise a concern, if required. Feedback from people was positive about the care they received and where minor concerns were raised, these were acted on promptly. Comments included, “I have not needed to raise any concerns with them” and, “We are happy, I would ring the office if anything needed changing.”

Staff knew what to do if they received a complaint. Examples of comments include, “I would report the (Complaint) to the [Registered] manager” and, “I have never had to deal with complaints as it is always a positive experience. If there was any concerns I would try to talk with them and escalate the concerns if unable to deal with them. I would let the management know.” Staff told us they were kept informed and updated in team meetings and in updates from the management team.

People’s care records confirmed reviews had been completed. Recent surveys had been undertaken. These included feedback from people and staff. Results from the surveys were seen. These included feedback about people’s experiences of care at the service. A complaints procedure was in place, along with a log to record the progress and outcomes. Where complaints had been received there was evidence of the actions taken as a result of them. Information about how to access advocacy services was on display in the office. This would support people with important decisions if these were required.

People and relatives said the staff accessed the support from professionals when this was required. Staff advised relatives of changes in conditions. Relatives told us staff treated people well.

Staff told us they were provided with enough time to support people’s needs during their visits. One said, “The registered manager is always available to talk.” The registered manager told us they were contactable by people and staff at all times. Staff confirmed they were able to contact the registered manager at any time.

Professionals were complementary about the service and their engagement with them.

Information and guidance was available to support people and the staff team. These included national guidance and useful contacts. Records had been completed which confirmed the management had linked in with relevant professionals, as required.

People and relatives told us they were included in the development and reviews of their care. All people had positive feedback about the care they received.

The management told us care was regularly discussed with people. They told us they linked in with people, relatives and professionals about people’s care. This would ensure people received the care according to their needs.

We saw positive feedback in surveys about the service, no concerns were raised about the care people received. Care records detailed information about people’s needs, their likes and choices. The provider had developed a logging system to record communications and updates with professionals. This would ensure care was provided in line with their up to date needs.

One relative discussed the involvement of carers support from the hospice team.

The management told us no one was in receipt of end of life care at the time of the assessment. However, some staff said they were currently supporting people with end of life care. The registered manager was able to discuss the respite support provided from the hospice. The registered manager said end of life training was provided and that policy and procedures were in place to support people at the end of their life, if required. Staff told us they had received end of life training. One said, “I have received training in end of life care.”

Training records confirmed end of life training had been undertaken by the staff team. Policies and procedures were in place to support staff in providing good care to people, as required. The management told us no one was in receipt of end of life care at the time of the assessment. Respite support for one relative was provided by the hospice team. This was recorded in the persons care records.