Right at Home South Trafford

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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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.

Staff delivered care which was tailored to each person’s preferences, routines and what mattered most to them. They took time to understand individual histories, interests and communication styles, and used this knowledge to shape support in a way that upheld dignity, independence and choice. Staff told us care plans were very detailed and they ensured staff were aware of the support required.

People told us their care and support were good and provided in a person-centred way. A relative told us, “It was very difficult at first having been so involved, knowing how we wanted things done, and it was hard to let go of the reins. But we have the confidence that she is alright and that comes with time, when you are having a positive experience.”

Everyone we spoke with confirmed staff understood their needs and any associated risks. Relatives told us they could access the portal and could check on the care and constantly found staff stayed for the full length of the visit. People told us their care was not rushed with one person telling us, ““I book them for an hour and they spend an hour. I never feel rushed.”

People and relatives were familiar with their care plan. They confirmed it was up to date and correctly reflected their current needs. Care plans were regularly reviewed with one person confirming someone from the office checks on a monthly basis to see how things are going

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 experienced consistent, well‑coordinated care because staff worked closely with other professionals and shared relevant information to support safe, joined‑up practice. Care was planned around each person’s needs and regularly reviewed to ensure support remained appropriate as circumstances changed. Strong communication between staff, families and external services helped maintain continuity, reduce disruption and ensure people received seamless, integrated care that reflected their individual preferences.

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

People received clear, accessible information from the start of their care. Everyone was given a guide to the service and a Statement of Purpose in their preferred format, with copies also kept in their care folder. Staff recognised people had different communication needs and provided information in easy‑read, large print, translated or digital formats, as well as through verbal explanation. Communication preferences, sensory needs and any involvement of family or advocates were identified at assessment and reviewed regularly. Staff checked understanding through conversation, rephrasing or repeating information where needed to ensure people felt informed and involved. People were kept updated about their care plans, visit schedules, changes to support and any concerns, using their preferred method of communication. Staff were trained in effective communication, including dementia and sensory‑impairment awareness, and used digital tools to support timely and consistent information sharing.

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.

People were supported to understand how to raise concerns, including through an easy‑read version of the complaints policy. No complaints had been made about the care people received, and staff continued to encourage individuals to share their views and experiences so the service could respond to their needs.

People felt listened to and involved in their care. On being listened to, one person told us, “Yes, I do. The ones (staff) in the morning do exercises on me and the ability to do those exercises without hurting me and achieve what is to be achieved gives me the confidence with them. They are very good.”

Another person told us, ““Yes. At the moment I am very pleased with the carers I have got. I have known them for years and they have got to know one another – friends rather than carers. I have no family, so it’s needed for the mental health as well as the physical health, from my point of view.”

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

The service promoted fair and equal access by ensuring that support was available to everyone regardless of their background, needs or circumstances. Staff took time to understand each person’s communication, cultural and accessibility requirements so that information, assessments and care could be delivered in a way that worked for them. Adjustments were made where needed, such as providing information in alternative formats, involving advocates, or adapting communication methods to remove barriers.

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 service promoted equitable experiences and outcomes by ensuring that every person received the same high standard of care, regardless of their background, needs or circumstances. Staff took time to understand individual preferences, communication needs and personal goals so support could be tailored fairly and consistently. Adjustments were made where required to remove barriers, ensuring people had equal opportunities to be involved in decisions, access information and achieve positive outcomes. Regular reviews and open communication helped identify any disparities early, allowing the service to respond proactively and ensure everyone experienced safe, person‑centred and inclusive care.

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.

People were supported to think ahead and make informed choices about their future care. Staff encouraged people to discuss their wishes, preferences and any anticipated changes in their needs, recording this in care plans and reviewing it regularly. People were supported to share as much or as little as they felt comfortable with, and families or advocates were involved where appropriate. Contact details for next of kin and key representatives were clearly documented to ensure communication remained consistent.

Policies and care‑planning processes were in place to guide future and end‑of‑life planning. Families generally took responsibility for overseeing end‑of‑life arrangements, while the service ensured people’s preferences were respected and their care remained dignified and person‑centred. The service was able to support people at the end of life, and staff had appropriate training to do so safely and sensitively. People chose to use the service because it enabled them to remain at home for longer with a package of support tailored to their needs and wishes.