Mi Life Care Services Limited

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 86 (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 was exceptional at making 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 received exceptionally personalised service where they were at the centre of the care being delivered. Care plans were detailed, robust and provided a clear profile of who people were, what was important to them, and how they wanted to be supported. Staff knew people and their needs and wishes well and went out of their way to provide the highest standard of care for them. People and relatives told us, “Staff know [Name] really well and that they like things their way. They will stay and talk with [Name] if they are feeling low in mood, even if it means going over their time, as they know this is important to [Name]. Sometimes [Name] will refuse things then decide they want them just as staff are leaving. Staff stay and help [Name] before they leave. They also let me know if they feel [Name] is low in mood.” Several relatives described the impact of staff being able to converse with their family members in their preferred language and how being aware of cultural needs, particularly around personal care and meals, had helped to establish trusting relationships and fostered personalised care.

Care plans included people’s life histories, key events and things that were important to them to support person centred care. For example, some aspects of a person’s past history caused them distress and staff were clearly directed to avoid conversations or references to this. Care records showed staff followed this guidance and this personalised approach reduced people’s distress and helped them achieve positive outcomes from their care.

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. This meant they worked proactively and flexibly with external partners (such as specialist nursing teams). The provider ensured they had the information they needed to support people. Care plans were bespoke and made it clear what staff needed to do where people had specific health conditions. People received consistent care from dependable staff, who received the right training to deliver person centred care. Staff were confident to advocate for people when needed, and to support them to pursue their own interests independently where they could.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The provider matched staff well to people they supported. Nine languages were spoken amongst the staff team, including Indian and Portuguese which helped to ensure information shared was effective and in line with people’s preferences. Staff spoke with people in a way they understood, using verbal and non-verbal communication. The provider acted in line with the Accessible Information Standard to ensure people’s information was accessible to them when the needed it. People’s care plans detailed how they preferred to communicate and how they liked to receive and process information. This supported people to be involved in decisions, choices and conversations.

The provider was exceptional at enabling people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff always involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

People were enabled to have choice and control of their lives. People were involved in their care as much as possible, and where relevant their relatives were also involved. A relative told us, “[Name’s] care is regularly reviewed, and the review involves the whole family.” When people couldn’t express their needs themselves, staff stepped in with genuine care making decisions guided by what they knew about each person, how they reacted, and what made them feel safe and understood. Without exception, every person and relative we spoke with felt listened to, involved and in control of their care. People’s care reviews clearly captured their views and their feedback, and these were listened to and acted on. For example, one person wanted to do their food shopping online. Their care plan was updated so staff could support the person to do this. A second person felt there was not enough time for staff to support them with their meal. The registered manager made an urgent referral to the commissioning body which resulted in an increase in time so the person did not feel they had to rush at mealtimes.

The provider had an effective complaints process, supported by a complaints policy and monitoring system. Records showed complaints and concerns were investigated, actions were identified, and learning was used to help improve the service and reduce the likelihood of similar issues occurring. People told us they felt able to provide feedback about the care they received and knew how to make a complaint if needed. They spoke positively about the registered manager, the provider and staff and told us they felt supported when raising concerns. People were confident that issues would be taken seriously and addressed appropriately. A relative told us, “There was a carer a while ago and I didn’t think they did much, mainly on their phone. I told the [registered manager] who was really good about it. The staff member never came back.”

The registered manager and care coordinators regularly sought feedback from people and their relatives through review meetings and ongoing discussions. In addition, regular spot checks were carried out in people's homes to monitor staff practice, gather feedback and ensure care was being delivered in line with people's preferences and expectations. Outcomes of spot checks including people’s feedback about their staff team, the care provided and the service overall. This was used to improve and develop the service.

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

People’s accessibility needs were considered as part of the initial assessment and added into care plans to allow staff to understand access requirements. We saw referrals to relevant agencies where people’s mobility needs had changed, for example, occupational therapists. People and relatives described how staff supported them to assess their environment and work with people and external agencies to ensure they had the equipment and adaptations needed to support them in their own homes.

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 demonstrated an exemplary, proactive approach to overcoming isolation among individuals within their own homes. Managers and staff demonstrated an awareness of the impact that discrimination, exclusion or inequality could have on people's experiences and outcomes. They were proactive in identifying when additional support or adjustments were needed. They provided translation and interpreter services where these were required and liaised with external agencies to help people access the services they required. By matching staff fluent in specific community languages and culturally specific care practices, the provider completely dismantled barriers to care. As a result, individuals from minoritised communities who previously faced high risks of isolation experienced equal, self-directed, and profoundly positive care outcomes in their own homes. Staff had completed equality and diversity training and demonstrated a good understanding of the importance of valuing people's differences and respecting their rights.

People were supported to access healthcare services and community resources when needed, helping to promote their health, wellbeing and independence. Care plans contained up-to-date information about people's preferences, including how their social, cultural and spiritual needs should be respected and supported. Relatives told us, “Staff support [Name] to go to the temple 3 times a week and to go shopping so they remain part of their community” and “Staff take [Name] to the local disco, the shops, parks and space centre and the day centre. [Name] really enjoys this and looks forward to going out.” Staff went above and beyond to identify and remove systematic barriers which isolated people. For example, a person was isolated in their own home whilst waiting for essential adaptations to be carried out. Staff recognised this barrier was impacting on the person's wellbeing. They produced an interim lifestyle plan which enabled the person to access the things that were important to them to maintain their wellbeing and facilitated arrangements which enabled them to access and manage their financial needs. This approach was praised by a professional who described a 'proactive approach that went above and beyond to help people achieve their outcomes. A second person needed assistance to manage the hazards presented by their home environment. In the absence of agency support, staff and managers worked with the person to address and mitigate risks, enabling the person to live in an environment that was safe and met their needs more effectively.

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. A relative praised the end of life care their family member received. They said, “Staff demonstrated a level of compassion, dignity, and humanity that went far beyond what we could have ever expected. They cared for [Name] with such gentleness and respect, always ensuring their comfort and preserving their dignity during an incredibly vulnerable time. They brought moments of calm and warm into what could have been an overwhelming experience. They also showed [family] kindness, patience and emotional support during moments of fear, exhaustion and sadness. Knowing we were not alone brought immense comfort to the family.” People were supported to make informed choices about their care and support. Care records captured what was important to each individual and where any advanced decisions had been made, this was recorded in care records. The provider supported people to make choices about their future care. quality of life.