Right at Home Calderdale

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good.

This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this

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 service did not always make sure people’s care and treatment were effective because they did not always check and discuss people’s health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Care plans were comprehensive and holistic. However, the service did not always have sufficient initial assessment information in place. For example, some assessments had details around people’s accessibility needs, medication and times and days of calls required missing. This was particularly important for individuals who had communication difficulties. The service has advised us how they plan to approve on assessing people’s needs. One person told us, “They [staff] always let me know if anything needs to change at all with my care.”

The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

There were detailed care plans regarding people’s care and treatment, as well as what was important to them. One person told us, “Everything was explained properly when I first started with them [the service].” People’s life histories, likes and preferences were well documented. Relevant legislation such as The Mental Capacity Act (2005) had been considered in ensuring the delivery of evidence-based care and treatment. People’s health conditions were well documented. There was specific information that supported care staff to understand people’s health needs. For example, explaining specific conditions and how this can affect people, such as, macular degeneration.

The service worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

Professionals told us leaders worked well with them to ensure consistent communication regarding people’s needs. One professional told us, “[The service] have built a solid working relationship over the last 3 years with clear communication between us and a shared interest in older people’s welfare. It has been a very effective collaboration.” People told us they were included in care planning and review, and care was well planned with them. One relative told us, “We’ve had a review recently and everything was very clear.” A relative told us, “My [relative’s] care is well organised and well planned.” Staff felt they worked well with leaders of the service.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to fully maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

The service worked closely with the local community to support people to live healthier lives, for example, promoting wellbeing and improve overall fitness. The service also collaborated with a charity that reduced isolation and loneliness and hosted regular events at no cost to people using the service. A professional from the charity told us, “The group would not be sustainable if it wasn’t for the partnership [with the service], and it’s gone from strength to strength providing a well needed safe social space for people in later life to mix together and encourage independence.”

The service also promoted increased support for carers, working closely with a carers support charity in support groups. One professional from this service told us, “The service has been a valued partner of ours for several years. Their involvement makes a real difference to the success of the group.”

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

The service completed regular care plan audits to ensure these were up to date and reflective of current needs and the services values. Leaders within the service complete regular spot checks to ensure staff continued to provide quality care. People told us they felt fully involved in the monitoring and reviewing of their care. One person told us, “They [the service] have regular reviews and keep everything under control.” There were also regular audits of safeguarding, incidents and accidents to identify learning, continued monitoring and oversight.

The service told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Consent documentation reflected the principles of mental capacity legislation. Consent forms were signed by people, and these took consideration of people who may lack capacity and had alternative arrangements for decision making. People said they were asked for consent before any care was delivered. “They [staff] ask me what I would like done and we decide together.” Another person told us, “They [staff] always ask for consent before doing anything.” Staff told us they considered consent before offering care interventions to people.