Classic Home Care Services 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 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 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.
Staff understood people’s individual needs, routines, preferences and what mattered to them. A person’s care plan described how staff should use direct communication, allow additional processing time and give advance notice of changes because routine was important to them. Another person’s records described their interests, relationships, preferred routines and community activities.
People and relatives told us care was personalised and responsive. Relatives said people were well looked after, staff knew people’s needs, supported them to maintain wellbeing and treated them with respect. A relative told us their family member “always looks lovely” and was supported to get “out and about doing lots of things with the staff.”
Staff feedback also supported this. Staff described care plans as tailored and said people and relatives were involved in decisions. Staff said support focused on people’s wishes, preferences and independence.
 

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.
Records showed care was adapted when people’s needs changed. One person’s care package increased when they needed additional support.
 

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.
Care plans included information about people’s needs, preferences, risks and support arrangements. The provider understood the accessible information standard and tried to present information in a variety ways to support people’s understanding.
 

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 and relatives told us they felt listened to and knew who to contact if they had concerns. Feedback collected from the provider described good communication with carers and office staff. People said they were comfortable ringing the office and relatives said communication was good.
The provider had a complaints process. Records showed complaints could be made verbally or in writing and should be acknowledged, investigated and responded to within set timescales. The most recent complaint was investigated and the provider responded in writing. The records showed the person’s own views were considered during the investigation.
 

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.
The provider made referrals to health professionals when needs changed, including occupational therapy, physiotherapy, GPs and mental health services in timely manner to ensure people’s health was prioritised.
 

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.
The provider considered people’s diverse needs and supported them with communication, mental health, cognitive, physical and sensory needs. Staff had guidance about supporting people with autism, dementia, degenerative neurological conditions, anxiety, schizophrenia, mobility needs, catheter care and risks linked to self-neglect.
 

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 provider planned with people and those important to them when needs changed. People were supported to remain at home as long as possible.