The Horizon (New) 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 registered 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 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.

The providers care plans reflected peoples preferences and how they wanted their care delivered. A relative told us they were actively involved in planning their family member’s care. Staff consistently respected people’s needs and choices. They understood what mattered to individuals and what made them feel good. One staff member shared, “[Person] likes to look good and enjoys having their hair done.” Staff were familiar with people’s religious preferences, the TV programmes they enjoyed, and the foods they liked.

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.

The management team and staff developed and maintained strong working relationships with external professionals to deliver good care provision and continuity. Information was shared between staff and the registered manager to ensure continuity of care. Care records included information from healthcare partners. Staff told us they were confident to contact external professionals themselves or speak with the management team if they needed to.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People’s care plans contained details of how they preferred to be communicated with, and how they liked information to be provided. For example, staff needed to wait for the person to respond and not ask too many questions at the same time. This provider had a policy to manage personal data and promote confidentiality.

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 had systems to involve people in shaping their care and were confident that both staff and management would take any concerns seriously. Annual quality assurance surveys were completed however, some questions lacked clarity. For example, 1 question asked: “How would you rate all staff who support you?” with response options such as “Strongly agree.” It was unclear whether this meant the person strongly agreed that staff were good, or if they were dissatisfied. The registered manager said they would review the format and wording of questions to ensure they are unambiguous and easily understood.

The management team regularly visited people to ensure they remained happy with the care being provided and enabled them to raise any issues and changes they may want.

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

People could access the care and support when they needed it. Times for visits were agreed with the person for a time that suited them. We saw rotas which confirmed this. Staff understood people’s needs and they were able to provide the support that was needed.A staff member told us, “There is a copy of the care plan in the person’s house, and we have access to it electronically.” This helped them to understand the person’s needs.

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.

Care plans provided clear details to staff on how people wanted their care to be delivered. The provider sought to meet people’s needs around equality and diversity, for example people were able to choose the gender of their care staff. Equality and diversity were also covered in people’s care plans. The provider had a policy on equality and diversity to help provide guidance to staff. Staff had completed equality and diversity training which helped them to understand discriminatory behaviours and practices.

People were not always 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.

Whilst people’s goals and wishes were well documented in their care plans their views about end-of-life care could be more robust. The management team were receptive to the feedback and were already working to address this at the time of inspection. At the time of our assessment, no one was in receipt of end-of-life care from The Horizon (New) Ltd.