A&J Assisted Living T/A Radfield Home Care Loughborough, Charnwood & Melton Mowbray Also known as Radfield Home Care Loughborough, Charnwood & Melton Mowbray

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 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 provider was exceptional at making 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.

People told us they were at the centre of their care and support. People enjoyed receiving visits from staff and told us how this impacted their lives in a positive way. Care calls were planned so they were more than a set of tasks to be completed. Consistent staff teams ensured positive relationships were formed and people and staff got to know each other well.

Person centred care plans were developed with the person and or their family members. Care plans included, physical, social, psychological and cultural needs and set out clearly how staff could meet these.

Care calls were kept under review so changes could be made where required. This included considering feedback from people and from staff. The length and timings of calls were carefully considered to ensure they were meeting the needs and preferences of the person. We were given examples of calls times being reduced and increased in response to people’s changing needs.

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

People told us they received the care and support they were paying for. People said they had have never had a missed call and it was extremely unusual for the care staff to be late for calls and if they were, they were always informed by the office that the staff member was running late (usually due to traffic issues or staff dealing with an emergency at the previous call).

People received care and support from the same staff member or team of staff members. The continuity of care meant people and staff got to know each other well. A family member told us, “The service has provided the same carers since we started and they have become like family, nothing is a trouble to any of them and because they have looked after [family member] so long they never miss anything.” A person told us, “One of the things I really do like is if a new carer starts they shadow a regular one to find out what I need doing, I like this as it makes me feel safe.”

People’s relatives were involved in care planning and support, they were consulted and asked to provide feedback

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

People’s care records, including information as to their progress, were accessible to the person and others involved in their care. Where appropriate, people’s relatives had on-line access to care records to keep updated about the plan and delivery of care and support.

People had access to key information in formats which met their communication needs, which included protected characteristics as defined by the Equality Act. For example, larger print versions of documents were provided when required.

People were offered appropriate modifications to meet their needs including the translation of information into other languages. Where people were living with dementia or mental health needs, staff adapted their approach to meet individual needs including involving people’s family members to support the process.

Staff understood people’s communication needs and these were recorded along with plans in place of how these needs could be met in the most effective way.

The provider was meeting the ‘accessible information standard’ which is a legal requirement for providers of health and social care. Staff had training and understood their responsibilities to meet general data protection regulations.

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.

People we spoke with told us staff and managers listened to them and took prompt action where there was an issue or a complaint. A family member told us they had raised a concern with a manager. They took swift action and resolved the issue immediately. One person said, “I have never had reason to raise a concern, and I never expect to but if we did have a problem I wouldn’t hesitate to ring and talk to the manager about it.”

Staff told us their managers would not tolerate staff who did not follow the providers policies and procedures or provide person centred care. They told us the manager would take steps to resolve any performance issues and if this was not possible, they would activate disciplinary procedures.

The provider had a complaints procedure and people knew how to make a complaint. The complaints procedure included clear timelines for action and response and included verbal as well as written complaints.

Complaints received were monitored as part of monthly and annual audits to ensure the provider’s policy was followed and appropriate action had been taken procedure. There were no active complaints at the time of this assessment.

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

People’s equality and diversity needs and protected characteristics under the Equality act 2010 were known and respected.

The provider had policies about supporting equality and diversity to prevent discrimination and ensure people had access to the care and support they required. The providers ‘core values’ also included respecting people’s equality and diversity needs.

People we spoke with told us they were respected and felt valued. They were supported to access the care and support they required.

Staff had received training and understood the providers policies. They were confident people’s equality and diversity were met so they could access services. They were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage different groups of people.

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.

People experienced good outcomes regardless of their needs, backgrounds or protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.

People we spoke with told us they were always consulted about care and support and their views were taken into account. One person said, “The carers who help me are so kind caring and very respectful to me.”

Staff knew people well and understood their individual needs. They were confident any inequalities would be challenged, and managers would act if this occurred.

Care planning for individual people supported equity in experience and outcomes. People’s unique needs and preferences were identified including any social, religious or cultural needs.

Policies in place were in-line with current best practice guidance around equality and discrimination.

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.

The service had considered and planned ahead to support people with future life changes. People were appropriately supported to be involved with future planning, including where there may be issues around capacity.

The assessment process ensured information was known and recorded as to any known wishes expressed by the person regarding treatment in the event their health deteriorated. ReSPECT forms (recommended summary plan for emergency care and treatment) were in place so staff knew what people’s wishes were regarding going into hospital or receiving further treatment. People’s decisions regarding resuscitation were also known and recorded.

At the time of our assessment there was no one receiving end of life care. The registered manager provided examples of when they had supported people at the end of their lives. These showed appropriate and responsive care and support was provided and that staff had consulted appropriate healthcare professionals for advice and guidance