Kaedi Recruitment Agency Ltd

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 service met people’s needs. This is the first inspection 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. People received care and support from staff based on care plans that were produced following an assessment of their needs.

Care plans and assessments were available electronically for staff to access on their phones, ensuring they could view up‑to‑date information. They included information about people’s backgrounds, interests, sexuality, cultural and religious needs. Staff told us care plans helped them get to know people. Care plans reflected the outcomes that mattered to people including what was important to them. Staff understood people’s histories, and preferences well. Staff worked in partnership with people so they could respond to changes in their needs. Staff received training, so that they ensured people remained at the centre of their care and treatment. Staff recognised the emotional needs of people who were anxious or expressed frustration. They took time to check people’s wellbeing and records confirmed this.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible or supportive of choice and continuity. Care was delivered in a coordinated and structured way that ensured people’s needs were met. People and relatives generally felt the service was safe and reliable but there was some concern that people did not always feel comfortable living in the same accommodation as others. Managers were aware of this and ensured people were safe at all times and they felt integrated into the service.

Staff demonstrated a sound understanding of each person’s care plan, risk assessments and daily routines, supporting continuity of care. Staff worked with partner agencies and multi‑disciplinary meetings were held regularly. Information was shared promptly, and staff consistently escalated concerns for example if people’s needs changed. Continuity of care was supported through stable staffing, clear handovers and digital records. This ensured all staff were kept up to date.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. They ensured people and relatives received information about their care and support, and staff knew how to explain tasks clearly to help people understand the daily events within the service. People received tenancy agreements, service user guides, and policies. They were supported to understand that they could choose to receive care from other providers if they wished. Staff explained boundaries clearly, including expectations around behaviour and conduct in shared spaces.

People and relatives told us communication with the management team was open and they could easily reach management when needed. The service was able to supply people with easy read information if necessary. People’s communication needs were assessed and discussed during their initial assessment. This ensured staff knew how to communicate with people effectively and respectfully.

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.

The provider used complaints, compliments and feedback systems, including anonymous questionnaires for people and staff. Concerns raised by people and relatives were investigated. For example, when people felt their concerns or worries about living in the service were not being acknowledged or understood. However, a person and a relative also told us they did not always feel listened to or treated equally. We discussed this with the management team and we were assured that all concerns were taken seriously. Records showed they had daily discussions with people to help try and resolve issues as soon as possible.

Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. Staff had regular, informal conversations with people and adapted their approach based on people's mood and mental health presentation. People were involved in care planning, reviews and risk management discussions alongside professionals. One person agreed changes to observation levels following joint discussions with staff and mental health coordinators.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People had fair access to the service, and the provider ensured care could be delivered safely and reliably within the borough. The provider ensured people with diverse needs, including those with mental health needs, autism or learning disabilities received appropriate support. Staff received mandatory training in equality, diversity, mental health, learning disabilities and autism. This helped staff recognise that people’s needs presented in different ways and adapt their support accordingly. The provider did not exclude people and worked with external professionals to maintain access to support.

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’s needs were assessed before starting the service to ensure their preferences could be appropriately met.

These assessments explored each person’s diverse needs. The registered manager and deputy manager demonstrated awareness of groups who may face barriers to equitable care, such as people from diverse backgrounds. Staff took account of people’s religious beliefs, sexuality, sexual needs and showed respect for their social and cultural histories. They also recognised the importance of promoting equality, diversity, inclusion and human rights.

People were supported to develop skills, confidence and independence at their own pace. Staff were sensitive, respectful and non‑judgemental, particularly when people were distressed or in crisis. The provider recognised the impact of mental health, trauma and abuse on people’s outcomes and worked with professionals to reduce harm and support their recovery. The registered manager said, “We have to support people and be very sensitive to their needs. This is how we challenge inequality. We aim not to make people feel out of place. We are inclusive and want to support people to improve their quality of life.”

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future. People’s families were involved in any decisions about people’s future care and support.

The provider recognised that people’s mental health could change quickly and focused on small, realistic steps. Staff prioritised stability and safety while continuing to work towards people’s goals. This approach helped people remain supported during periods of uncertainty.