Hennis Joe 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

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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. Care plans lacked sufficient detail in relation to people’s health needs. For example, where people required support with moving and handling and the prevention of pressure sores, there was limited information describing how staff should provide personalised support. In addition, we identified gaps within eating and drinking care plans. While records stated that a person required a puréed diet as recommended by the Speech and Language Therapy (SALT) team, there was no information about the person’s food preferences, including likes and dislikes.

We found no evidence of harm, and the provider was in the process of reviewing and updating all care plans and risk assessments at the time of the inspection.

However, staff were able to clearly describe how they supported people with moving and handling and the equipment required. Staff were also able to explain people’s food preferences. One member of staff told us, “[Person] likes Nigerian food. We make jollof rice and meat, which is blended as [person] is on a puréed diet.”

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 people’s care provision was kept to regular staff where possible. Communication between other health and social care professionals were effective and enabled prompt adjustment of people’s care if required.

People had allocated key workers and meetings were held regularly with the keyworker to discuss people wellbeing and support. The management team told us the service ensured where possible for people to have the same care staff to form positive relationships and people received good care provisions and continuity of care.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The principles of Accessible Information Standards were being met. Communication plans were in place that included information on how to communicate effectively with people and people’s preferred communication style. Staff told us that they had access to communication materials when required to communicate with people effectively and communication plans supported them. A staff member commented, “Because most staff speak in same language, [person] feels very comfortable to express their needs.” A relative told us, “Staff speak same language that we do. [Person] understands them.”

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.

No complaints had been made since the service started. However, a complaints process was in place to ensure any concerns were appropriately investigated and learnt from. People and their relatives were encouraged to speak up and openly with staff and management team. A relative told us, “I have the registered manager number, I can contact her anymore if I have any issues."

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

The provider had equality and diversity policies in place. Staff completed equality and diversity training, which helped to ensure they understood the potential barriers to accessing care people may face and how they could be supported to overcome them. This helped to ensure people could access care and support when they needed, promoting equality and protecting their rights.

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. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. People and family members were positive about the care and support they were receiving.

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.

At the time of inspection no one was receiving end of life care. The registered manager said if they supported someone with end of life care needs, they would develop a care plan to discuss the person's wishes and would ensure staff were adequately trained.