Ezey Care Limited

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 provider met people’s needs. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care plans included detailed information about things that were important to people including, things they liked to do, how they preferred to communicate and the additional support they needed if they became distressed. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s needs, preferred method of communication and life history, and used this knowledge to support them to understand and manage risks in a meaningful and person-centred way. For example, staff were able to tell us in detail about people’s needs, preferences and how they liked to be supported. Their care plan was developed collaboratively and included people’s views and how their personalised support would be delivered. A community-based care professional told us, “The service works closely with our client and their next of kin to ensure they are actively involved in planning the care they receive. Our client expressed a wish to be part of their care plan review, which staff respected.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, and ensured care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People received continuity of care and support from dedicated small groups of staff, including the registered manager. This meant staff were experienced and familiar with their needs, strengths, preferences and daily routines. Staff demonstrated strong commitment, teamwork and compassion, which supported both their wellbeing and the quality of the home care provided.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The registered manager and staff worked closely with people they supported, their next of kin and community-based care professionals to understand how this person communicated their wishes and to ensure essential information they needed was always accessible and understood. Staff used verbal, written and pictorial information to support people’s understanding. For example, staff used a picture board which contained photographs of the person’s favourite restaurants to help him make informed decisions about where he wanted to eat out or have as a takeaway meal at home.

The care plan made it explicitly clear that staff needed to speak slowly and clearly and use simple, plain language to effectively communicate with the person they supported.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

A relative told us they had regular opportunities to speak to the manager [registered] and the staff who supported their [family member]. They said, “The manager [registered] and staff listen to what I have to say about how best to support my [family member] and always take my comments into account. For example, staff now know how my [family members] likes his hair to be cut, which they didn’t before.”

People had access to easy to understand information about how they could report concerns and how these would be dealt with by the provider. Staff used a range of methods to encourage the person and their next of kin to have their say and state their views about the care provided, including regular telephone and in-person contact through meetings and care plan reviews.

The provider made sure that people could access the care and support they needed when they needed it.

People had equitable access to the service, and support was adapted to ensure their needs, preferences and circumstances were met. Records showed People received care and support at times that suited them, with daily routines and activities planned around their choices, preferences and needs. Adjustments were made to promote inclusion, safety and choice.

People had sufficient opportunities to engage in meaningful leisure activities at their home and in the local community that reflected their social interests and needs. For example, people were provided with additional staff support whilst accessing the wider community, so they could safely go shopping locally for clothes and food, attend medical appointments, enjoy meals out and drives. Their next of kin were involved in discussions about social interests, which was recorded in their care plan.

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

The registered manager and staff respected and valued the individual characteristics, diverse needs, personal routines and needs of people they supported. They assessed and planned for their diverse needs and made sure barriers to providing care were identified and mitigated. Care plans contained detailed information about an individual’s needs, including those relating to communication, culture and religion. Staff had received equality and diversity training to help ensure the person they supported received fair and equal treatment. The registered manager and team leader reinforced this learning through supervisions and meetings.

People were not always 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.

People receiving home care did not require any support with end of life care at the time of this assessment. The person and people important to them had not been involved in discussions or decisions about their future care needs and end of life wishes, and no recorded details were included in the care plan.

We discussed this issue with registered manager at the time of the assessment. They agreed to involve all the relevant people is discussions about future care needs and end of life wishes. It was also acknowledged if people and their relatives did not want to discuss future care needs and end of life wishes this still needed to be recorded in their care plan.

The registered manager and staff worked-well with people they supported, their relatives and community-based care professionals to help plan goals and objectives for the person using the service, including developing their independent living skills.