Altogether Care - Care At Home Limited Christchurch

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 service met people’s needs.This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.This is the first inspection of this key question for this newly registered service. 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 service 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. People told us the care they received was person centred; they said staff did what they needed them to do. Staff told us they had enough up-to-date information about people’s needs to provide safe care, Staff were confident in the service they provided and told us it was important to make sure people where at the centre of their care. A staff member said, “Let love lead! Background or values does not matter as long as everyone is treated with respect.” The provider had an electronic care planning system which meant information was updated or changed promptly. A person told us they felt staff knew them well and said, “They understand me.”

The service 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 told us they had access to the care they needed to live well at home. This included seeing their GP or nurse. People were confident in the staff to keep them safe, a person told us, “The carers won’t let me do anything dangerous or risky in case I fall, they do care and look after me.” Staff told us they routinely contacted professionals to support people such as, GPs, community nurses and therapists, this had varied dependent on the person’s needs. Records showed input from a variety of health and social care professionals; the interactions were positive. Information was shared through telephone calls, meetings and messages.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People told us staff communicated well with them and provided information about care visits and timings. People’s communication needs were detailed in care and support plans. This information was highlighted if a person had communication difficulties and shared with relevant health and social care professionals. We were assured this service met the requirements of the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The AIS isa law to make sure that people who have a disability, impairment or sensory loss receive information they can easily read or understand. The service adapted to meet people’s individual communication needs. The registered manager told us where people had specific communication needs staff would ensure they were followed; an example was where staff wrote important information on a whiteboard for a person so they were aware of events happening each day.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. The service actively sought feedback from people, their relatives, professionals and staff. Information was continually shared with people and staff and this was updated. People told us they knew how to raise a concern or make a complaint. A person told us, “They never let me down they come when they are supposed to.” Everyone was positive and had confidence in the service and the registered manager to address any concerns they had. A complaints policy supported the practice of the service, records showed these had been dealt with in accordance with the policy. Information and feedback were sought and had the oversight of the provider to ensure quality of service.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.People told us the service they received was accessible and considered their individual needs. Staff received training in equality and diversity, they told us they supported people to live well. A person said, “They certainly treat me with dignity and respect that’s for sure, no question about that.” Policies and procedures underpinned all safe working practices, and this was supported by training and ongoing competency monitoring. A staff member told us, “I believe that no two people are the same, and everyone has their own unique background, beliefs, and values. Every client is entitled to have their beliefs and values respected. As a company, we uphold this by ensuring we do not impose our personal opinions and always treat each client with dignity and respect.”

We did not look at Equity in experiences and outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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 provided with the opportunity to discuss their care needs and their wishes for the future. Care plans were person centred, and initial assessments and regular reviews meant the service had recorded the people’s views. A person told us, “The carers look after all of my needs, and I am happy for my future.” The registered manager told us they worked well with external health and social care professionals to support end of life care. Records showed people’s wishes were detailed including their preferences regarding emergency care.