Agincare Enable Limited (Wiltshire and Swindon)

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 key question since the provider changed. 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 and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. This meant people received the most up to date support in line with their changing needs.

People and relatives told us they were happy with the service provided, which met their specific needs. Staff told us providing a service to meet people’s specific needs was the prime focus of the registered manager and the team. This approach was reflected in the care records we reviewed.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities. Care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People’s care records demonstrated the service had worked with other care providers and health services to ensure people received continuity of care. This meant people received a holistic and inclusive service and were put at the centre of care delivery.

Relatives feedback about care provision was positive; some told us ‘If I have concerns then I know they [the provider] will phone back’ and ‘Safety issues are resolved’. Feedback from relatives included “Communication with all of the team is excellent” and “I felt that [person] was as well looked after as [they] are by me”.

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

People told us they received all the information they needed from the provider, in formats which were accessible to them. People's communication needs had been assessed, and a communication care plan had been developed. We saw some staff using touch to communicate with people who had a visual impairment. We also observed staff providing information to a person though the use of sign language.

A relative wrote an email and felt the response from the provider was “responsive and listened”.

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 registered manager regularly visited people to monitor the way staff were supporting them and to get their feedback.

However, during a “speaking up” session, one person had complained about a waking night knocking on their door in the early hours. They said they had raised this once before but had not been listened to. We viewed the provider’s complaints and compliments tracker and saw that this concern had not been recorded.

Another person told us they had a chair which was broken, and they would like a new one.

We raised this with the provider who took immediate action to investigate and record both of the concerns.

We then reviewed all other concerns and saw that the provider was recording and investigating issues in a timely and appropriate way. We saw evidence of family invitations to person-centred reviews and health meetings.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Assessments covering the accessibility of people’s home and whether any adaptations or equipment were needed had been completed. These assessments were reviewed and updated where needed.

Where people moved homes, we saw the provider actively working in partnership with other organisations. The provider took an opportunity from a complaint from a relative to review the support offered to people when moving in.

People’s homes were accessible and suited to their needs. We viewed some team meeting notes that discussed a person’s support needs changing and we saw that staff had thought about what they could do to ensure the person was receiving the support they needed and adjustments they could implement around the home to make things easier for the person’s needs.

People were supported on holidays abroad, these holidays had been risk assessed and where people wanted, were supported to learn some words from the language of the country they were going to.

The provider recognised the rural setting of the homes and worked hard to ensure that people were supported to apply for their own mobility vehicles so that they were not entirely dependent on public transport or taxis.

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.

The registered manager told us they recognised the barriers people living with disabilities and people from minority communities may face. They took action to develop relationships with community businesses that are inclusive of people so that people could engage in meaningful paid work.

People who actively practiced a religion were supported to access local events. Another person who was passionate about their community was supported to regularly litter pick.

People were supported to access services, local communities and healthcare by staff, where needed. Staff had been supported to complete equality and diversity training and specialist autism training.

People were supported to plan for important life changes. This allowed them enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. Staff were aware of people’s wishes for the future, for example whether people wanted to go to hospital for further treatment or whether they wished to remain at home. These decisions were recorded in respect documents and advanced care documents. This information was also recorded in people’s care plans.

The provider did not have any end of life training in place despite many people within the service becoming older and some developing health concerns. We addressed this with the provider, and they took immediate action to allocate training to staff who were supporting older people and people who were experiencing loss or bereavement.