JJR Care 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 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.

Care plans were person centred and demonstrated people were at the heart of the assessment. They included people’s routines and how they liked to be supported. Care plans included people’s backgrounds with a pen picture about them and detailed information on support required such as with personal care, medicines, mobility and meals and drinks.

We saw evidence in the daily records that staff followed and understood people's care needs. We discussed with the registered manager the way in which the daily records could be more person centred as they were currently task based. They agreed to look at ways in which people’s wellbeing was recorded in order to monitor their ongoing physical and emotional health.

Staff told us they knew how people liked to be supported and gave us examples of people’s preferences. Staff told us that care plans were clear, easy to read and understand, and it helped them to provide good care. Staff felt the registered manager would act on any concerns they had regarding people’s needs and wellbeing.

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 had a positive relationship with staff who supported them. Staff told us they knew people and their needs well. The provider liaised with family members where there were any issues or concerns so that action could be taken. Communication and information sharing with family members was joined up and positive. We looked at the monitoring of calls which showed good punctuality and continuity of care. A family member said, “The staff do come on time, however, if they are running late for any reason, the manager will notify ahead of time, which to me is acceptable.”

Staff completed daily notes when care was delivered to ensure people received continuity of care. Staff would know what tasks had been completed on the previous visits and any information shared as to changes needed.

The management team told us the service ensured where possible for people to have the same care staff, to form positive relationships. People confirmed they received good care provision as a result. If a care worker was new to the person, they would be introduced and work with the service manager to ensure they were competent to carry out the care and support needed.

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

People were given information in a way which met their communication needs. The provider met the Accessible Information Standard whereby they could provide information in alternate formats, when needed. People’s communication needs and preferences were recorded within their care plans.

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 and family members were able to share their views of the care provided through reviews and surveys. The most recent survey in November 2025 showed JJR Care Ltd was delivering consistently high standard of care. People felt safe, respected and satisfied with the quality of care. Improvements had been made as a result of comments made such as better communication channels and faster responses between staff and people and their family members when things changed.

There were systems to manage concerns and complaints. A complaints policy was in place that detailed the process of managing complaints. Audits showed a small number of concerns had been dealt with for example, leaving the kitchen tidy and another for cleaning expectations. Action was taken to remedy the situation with apologies given. No formal complaints had been made and family members confirmed this in their comments to us. “We do not have any reason to complain, as we are all happy with the service” and “[Relative] has not complained so far, knowing my [relative] if they were not happy, they would say it” and “I am happy with the care agency, and my family cannot fault them and have no concerns.”

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

Managers were aware of how discrimination and inequality could disadvantage different groups of people in accessing their service whether this is from wider society, within organisational processes and culture or from individuals.

The provision of care for people was offered in a timely manner and in a way which worked for them and their families. Processes were in place for when visits to people were unexpectedly delayed and audits showed no missed calls had been recorded.

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’s equality characteristics such as their age, gender, ethnicity, religion and disability were mostly recorded in their care plans. The cultural and spiritual needs of people were considered when providing a service. Staff were matched to people so their care and support could be tailored to them and their cultural backgrounds. Staff had received training in equality and diversity as part of their induction.

The registered manager gave us an example of how they had tailored a person’s care to achieve good outcomes when they came out of hospital. “With the continued encouragement from staff around the person’s mobility and exercises, improvements in their wellbeing, confidence and emotional stability were good to see. They are more confident, physically stable, and a consistent daily routine has supported their overall recovery.”

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 had discussions with people during the assessment process about any end of life wishes or arrangements they had made. Where these were in place, they were written in a respectful way within the care plan.

At the time of our assessment, no one using the service was in receipt of palliative or end of life care. Whilst the management team had experience of working with people at the end of their life, training for staff had not yet been completed. They told us training in end of life care would be added to the 2026 training calendar.