• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Optimum Care Ltd

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

192 Park Road, Peterborough, PE1 2UF (01733) 971333

Provided and run by:
Optimum Care Ltd

Assessment report published 18 July 2025

On this page

Responsive

Good

17 July 2025

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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.

Person-centred Care

Score: 3

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.

Improvements had been made since the last inspection. Since the last inspection a lot of work had taken place on improving the information held in people's care records (care plans and risk assessments) to help guide staff. A relative explained how they felt supported by the staff as well as staff supporting their family member. They said, “[Staff] are so understanding, without being over-familiar.” They went on to tell us how staff gave them support when needed and were always kind and considerate to their family members.

Care provision, Integration and continuity

Score: 3

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. Staff understood the importance of supporting people’s cultural and religious needs. We saw clear guidance for staff on how to support a person in line with their religious beliefs.

Providing Information

Score: 3

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People's care records included an 'Assessable Information Standard' section. This was set out clearly to guide staff, on how a person was best supported with their communication needs to help aid their understanding of information.

People's care records and staff records were held in secured offices.

Listening to and involving people

Score: 3

The provider enabled people to share feedback, or raise complaints about their care, and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care. Records showed that where complaints had been logged there were actions taken to try to resolve them. Most people felt listened to. A relative said that they had complained once, and the issue was resolved. Another told us, “Any issues are resolved very quickly by staff or admin.”

Equity in access

Score: 3

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

People had access to external health professionals to promote and maintain their wellbeing. Staff, when needed could assist people to attend external appointments if needed.

Equity in experiences and outcomes

Score: 3

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. People's cultural and religious preferences were documented to guide staff. This included important information contained within a person's hospital passport which detailed their religious beliefs and wishes on how they wished to be cared for. Staff undertook training in equality, diversity and human rights. A staff member understood the importance of supporting people with individualised person-centred care in line with people's wishes.

Planning for the future

Score: 3

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. Personalised information was held to guide staff included on whether a person wished to be admitted to the intensive care ward in hospital and or whether there were 'do not attempt resuscitation' forms in place. These advance decisions recorded people's wishes on whether they would choose to be resuscitated or not should their health significantly decline.

Where people had specific religious wishes that they wanted to take place at the end of their life, these wishes were documented to guide staff.