Tender Hands Homecare 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 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 provider was committed to ensuring people received care which was person-centred and tailored to their individual needs, preferences and wishes. People were encouraged to discuss their personal outcomes and goals, which were clearly documented within their care plans. This helped to ensure care and support reflected what was important to them.

People were actively involved in planning their care and were supported to contribute to discussions about their needs and how these should be met. This approach promoted choice, control and independence and helped to ensure people remained at the centre of decision-making about their care.

People received support from a consistent staff team who knew them well and understood their individual needs and preferences. Staff were able to recognise and respond appropriately to changes in people's needs, helping to ensure care remained effective, responsive and tailored to individual circumstances.

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 received care and support that reflected their individual needs, preferences and abilities. Staff understood people's wishes and delivered care in a way that promoted choice, independence and person-centred outcomes.

The provider could not fully demonstrate that all staff had the most up-to-date knowledge and competencies required to consistently meet people's needs. We discussed this with the provider, who responded promptly and took action to address the identified gaps in training as part of their improvement plan.

The provider worked collaboratively with external professionals and stakeholders to help ensure people's needs were met. This included engaging with healthcare services and other partner organisations where appropriate to support people's health, wellbeing and overall quality of life.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

There were policies and procedures in place to support people with a range of communication needs. People's communication preferences and requirements were considered within their care plans, which included guidance for staff on how to support individuals to communicate effectively.

However, there was limited evidence to demonstrate that information was consistently provided in formats tailored to people's individual communication needs. This meant the provider could not always demonstrate how accessible information and communication requirements were being fully met in practice.

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.

There were policies and procedures in place to support gathering feedback from people using the service.

We saw the provider had clear processes for receiving, investigating and responding to complaints. There was evidence that complaints were investigated and feedback provided to people when needed.

People told us they knew who to speak to and how to raise concerns if they needed. One person told us, “I have not had to complain about anything, but I do know how to if I needed to. I could always speak to the registered manager.” However, there was no evidence of how the learning was applied and used to improve the overall delivery of care to people.

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

People received appropriate support and care from relevant professionals when required. The provider worked with a range of stakeholders and external partners to ensure people’s health and outcomes were met. This collaborative approach supported coordinated care and enabled people to access specialist input when required.

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.

People told us the provider was open to people’s feedback, and they provided opportunities to share their feedback. We saw evidence of service reviews being completed and questionaries regarding the quality-of-care people received. One person told us, “The managers are very easy to communicate with. Their management style is hands on which is good. I have done some feedback and I would definitely recommend these to others.” One relative told us, “Management are always very responsive with any questions I ask. They are always on the ball.”

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 and staff worked to support people in achieving their individual goals and desired outcomes, including during the last stages of their lives. Care plans were generally detailed and contained information about what was important to people, their personal goals and aspirations, and how staff should support them to achieve these outcomes.

People's care records included guidance for staff on how to meet their assessed needs and support their preferences, helping to ensure care was delivered in a person-centred manner. Where appropriate, care plans also contained information relating to people's wishes and preferences for end-of-life care, enabling staff to provide compassionate and dignified support in line with people's choices.

Records overall demonstrated that the provider recognised the importance of supporting people to achieve outcomes that were meaningful to them and took steps to ensure staff had access to the information needed to provide personalised care and support.