Archived: Hounslow and Ealing

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 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 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 ensured people received person-centred care which met their needs and reflected their choices. People told us their needs were met. Relatives explained people received good support with personal care and to have meals. Care plans included personalised details. Staff were familiar with these. Staff told us about the individual people they were caring for and how they supported them. They demonstrated a good understanding of people’s needs.

The provider supported some people to access services within the community. This included escorting people to appointments, attending places of worship and with leisure activities. Relatives told us they were happy with this support. Staff told us some of the factors they considered when supporting people outside of their homes. They explained they assessed and planned for different risks and that community access was important for people’s physical and emotional wellbeing. The registered manager told us all external activities were individually assessed, and the management team visited the different venues to make sure they had considered all potential risks. They told us these assessments were reviewed and updated to reflect changes in weather, conditions and other external factors.

The agency made sure they provided a range of accessible and useful information. One relative told us, “The information and communication are excellent.” Care documents, information about the service and staff handbooks and guidance were all available in different languages and formats when this was needed. The registered manager told us they made sure information was translated for people to understand this. They told us the staff team, including the management team was diverse and spoke over 7 different languages with multiple cultural backgrounds. They explained how this helped them to make sure different people’s needs were met through translated and clear information.

The provider listened to and involved people. Relatives confirmed this and explained that they could contact the management team at any time and felt heard. Their comments included, “I have no complaints but I have a direct contact with the manager which is reassuring if I need this”, “The manager phones me up and asks me if I have any comments or complaints”, “If I need to speak with them I add a note and they respond quickly” and “The staff use [sign language] to help listen to [person].” There were regular reviews of people’s care, and we saw records which showed the management team telephone people, asked for written feedback and visited them regularly to discuss their care and their experience of the service. There was a complaints procedure and copies of this were given to people. People and their relatives told us they knew how to make a complaint and felt these would be addressed if needed.

The provider helped make sure people could access the service. They provided translated information and staff who could converse in people’s first language. There was a 24-hour emergency call system. Both staff and relatives told us managers were available whenever they needed.

The provider had procedures to help promote equality and diversity. Staff had training in these. Staff were required to undertake literacy and numeracy tests to ensure they had the right levels of skills and competencies to provide safe care. People’s care plans included information about their diverse needs, language, culture, sexuality and disabilities. They also included information about whether people had preferences for the gender of the care workers or a language need. People told us these preferences were respected and met.

The provider helped people to plan for the future. They had discussions with people about providing personalised care at the end of their lives. Their preferences were recorded. The staff had training to understand about good end of life care. The registered manager told us they met with families following a person’s death to ask whether they could have done anything differently so they could learn from this. They also provided support for relatives and staff following a bereavement. People’s care plans considered other future plans and long-term goals. For example, supporting people to access new activities and to become more independent.