House of Caring 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 of this service. This key question has been rated good. 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 made sure people who used the service and their families were at the centre of planning their care and responded to any changes in people’s needs. People’s support plans were detailed and person-centred, capturing their strengths and abilities as well as their care needs.

Relatives told us they and their family members had been involved in developing their family members’ care plans. They said staff understood their family members’ needs and preferences well, which meant they provided effective person-centred care. One relative told us, “The carers actively involve both [family member] and us in her care plan. They take the time to understand her preferences, sensory needs, and communication style, ensuring she feels comfortable and engaged. We are regularly consulted about any changes in her routine or care strategies, making us feel valued and included in decision-making.”

Staff told us they were given enough information about people’s need before they began to support them. One member of staff said, “We are given care plans and risk assessments to read in advance and told about any special needs or behaviours, especially for complex needs clients.” Another member of staff told us, “I receive enough information about people’s needs before I begin supporting them. Having detailed care plans and handover notes helps me provide safe, consistent, and person-centred care from the start.”

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.

People’s care was well co-ordinated and responsive to their needs. Staff told us their rota was planned to ensure they had enough time at each call to provide the care outlined in people’s support plans. They said they also had time to talk to the people they supported, which they recognised was important. One member of staff told us, “I use the time to give quality care and make sure I don't rush things.” Another member of staff said, “I am given enough time to complete care tasks and also spend time talking to the person, which is important.”

Relatives said staff and managers communicated effectively with them to ensure their family members’ care was well planned and delivered. One relative told us, “Information is passed efficiently between the carers, management, and our family. Daily logs are maintained, and any important updates about [family member’s] well-being or routine are communicated clearly. We appreciate the transparency and consistency in keeping us informed.”

Professionals reported the provider worked well with them to ensure people received consistent yet flexible care. One professional told us, “House of Caring have demonstrated they are an effective communicator and have always been a very responsive provider.”

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

People’s communication needs were discussed during their initial assessments and recorded in their care plans. The PIR stated, ‘We work with each person and their family to create a detailed communication profile which outlines their preferred communication methods, whether they use verbal communication, sign language, symbols, or assistive technology.’

The provider confirmed that information was in alternative formats, including large print, Braille, audio and different languages, should this be needed. Some of the children being supported and their families did not speak English as a first language. The registered manager told us the local authority provided an interpreter where necessary to ensure people who used the service and their families had access to information about their care.

The provider ensured staff had the skills they needed to communicate effectively with the people they supported. The PIR stated, ‘For individuals with learning disabilities or autism, our staff are trained in Makaton and Picture Exchange Communication Systems (PECS), which enables us to communicate more effectively through visual symbols and sign language. These methods help reduce frustration and ensure that individuals can express their needs, preferences, and emotions.’

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas or raise concerns about their care and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Relatives told us the management team regularly contacted them to ask for feedback about their family members’ care and whether any changes were needed. One relative said, ‘Every month or so we receive an email from the management asking if there is anything we need to raise about the care or carers.”

Professionals told us the provider was responsive to any issues raised and took prompt action to address them. They said they were confident the provider would respond appropriately if concerns were raised. One professional told us, “There have been some minor incidents such as late and early arrivals of care staff. However, if issues do arise the agency has always been proactive in addressing them and communicating with the local authority with appropriate explanations. I have not had any cause to raise concerns, as my experience has been consistently positive, and I am confident that any concerns would be taken seriously and addressed promptly and constructively.”

The provider made sure people could access the care and support they needed in a timely way. People’s care was planned in a way which worked for them, and which promoted dignity, equality, and human rights.

Leaders and staff were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage people in accessing care and support. The provide used feedback to improve access for people more likely to experience barriers or delays in accessing their care.

The provider complied with legal equality and human rights requirements, including avoiding discrimination, considering the needs of people with different protected characteristics, and making reasonable adjustments.

Staff and leaders listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care and support in response to this.

People’s care and support promoted equality, removed barriers and protected their rights. People felt empowered to give their views and understand their rights. People’s experiences were listened to and acted on to improve care.

The provider complied with legal equality and human rights requirements, including avoiding discrimination and having regard to the needs of people with different protected characteristics.

People’s assessments recorded their aspirations for the future and their care plans outlined the support they needed to achieve these. People were 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. The provider worked closely with healthcare professionals including GPs, district nurses and hospices to plan and deliver compassionate, person-centred end of life care.

People were able to discuss their preferences about the care they wished to receive towards the end of their lives and these were recorded in their care plans. This included their religious and cultural needs, which for some people who used the service was very important. A ‘Comfort care plan’ was also developed for people receiving end of life care, which recorded the support they required to manage their needs in relation to personal care, dignity and respect, pain management, diet and nutrition, and emotional and psychological support.

Relatives whose family members had received end of life care from the service praised the care staff had provided. They said staff had been able to adapt to their family member’s changing needs and demonstrated a caring and compassionate approach. One relative told us, “There were many changes needed in [family member’s] care. House of Caring ensured that the carers were suitably trained throughout these changes. Frankly, they did an excellent job which I couldn't fault and I believe this was because management had selected ladies with the right temperament.”

The relative told us the registered manager had provided valuable support to them in coordinating the care their family member needed. The relative said, “The manager worked with me to communicate with the hospital, hospice, GP, etc. to get the best outcome. Initially it was very frustrating for me because it was quite obvious that the process and responsibilities were not clear with regard to care at home, so House of Caring really helped and supported me through this.”