Amron Home Help 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 provider met people’s needs.This is the first assessment for this newly registeredservice. This key question has been ratedGood.This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 79 (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 ensured people were at the centre of their care. People were involved in planning their support and any changes were discussed with the person or relative before plans were changed. Families and people using the service confirmed the service was very "person-centred”. They told us their individual preferences had been recorded in care plans and were acknowledged and respected by the staff team. An emphasis had been placed on supporting people to maintain the skills they still had and to concentrate on areas of assessed need. This person-centred approach extended to involving people in their support plans and the review of these documents. People were invited to comment on the level of person-centred support they received through care plan reviews and quality assurance documentation. This evidenced person-centred care was promoted.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and ensured care was coordinated, flexible, and responsive. Partnership working with health and social care professionals helped ensure people received coordinated care, timely interventions, and opportunities to be involved in decisions about their support.

We found the service supported people with specific needs to access community and family events. Examples include arranging specialist transport and mobility aids so that one person could attend a relative’s birthday event; supporting people who demonstrated anxiety and distress within a community setting to visit a hairdresser and other social events. These were accompanied by risk assessments specific to these events. The service had assisted in supporting a person to re-establish links with people in their past that shared common interests. These actions demonstrated a responsiveness that was in addition to their initial assessed support needs.

The provider supplied appropriate information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People and their families told us effective communication between them and the service had been established. People confirmed they received the information they needed in order to make informed judgements and influence their support. Newsletters for people were made available in specialist audio and simplified formats in line with accessible information standards.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback, express their views, and raise concerns or complaints about their care and support. Information was available in accessible formats, including easy-read documents with pictures.

People and their relatives told us they knew how to make a complaint and had access to the provider’s complaints procedure. One person told us they had made a complaint, and the registered manager had dealt with this ‘really well’. Complaints records were maintained with details on how the complaint had been dealt with and any actions put into place to address the concerns. Staff told us the management team were supportive and approachable, and they felt comfortable with making suggestions to improve the service. The provider had systems in place to enable people to share feedback and ideas, or make compliments about their care, treatment and support. Relatives and staff confirmed they felt comfortable raising concerns or making suggestions and felt listened to. The service had changed from a paper-based system to a digital care planning system. People and their families were asked to comment on whether this change had been successful.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People and their relatives told us that the service was reliable, and no calls were ever cancelled. Support was provided in a timely manner. People were able to contact the service and there was access to an on-call support for staff during out of office times. People received equity in support with any protected characteristics considered. Leaders and staff are alert to discrimination and inequality that could potentially disadvantage different groups of people in accessing the service.

Staff and leaders actively listened to and understood the individual needs of people who may be at risk of experiencing inequalities in their care and support. The service was non-discriminatory and people received equal opportunities within the service and the community. People were treated equally and received the same consideration of their needs and opportunities to influence their support. People were consistently positive about the level of service they received ,and this evidenced the level of equality within the service. Any cultural or religious needs of people were recorded in support plans. All staff could access meetings and supervision sessions. All staff had received equality and diversity training.

Staff priorities and care planning lay with ensuring people could maintain their lifestyle and express their continued aspirations to live in their own properties and maintain day to day relationships.Where applicable, support plans contained information about arrangements for people reaching the end of their lives.