Maisy Care at Home Ltd

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

This is the first assessment for this service since the location changed. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People told us staff were kind, respectful and patient. Comments from relatives included, “Staff are very professional and always make [person] laugh” and “[Staff member] knows my needs – they’re great with me.” Daily notes showed staff communicated well with people making sure information was understood. People’s privacy was upheld by staff who respected people’s personal space and kept sensitive information confidential.

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People told us staff treated them as individuals and met their specific needs. Staff demonstrated a good knowledge of people they supported and described the individual approach they took to meeting people’s needs. Details of people’s individual needs were reflected in their support plans, including specific ways people communicated and how they preferred support to be provided. People had individual risk assessments which changed in line with their fluctuating abilities. Comments from people included, “When my needs changed, staff were great in involving the right people to make sure my care changed in line with my needs.”

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Care records contained details of what support people required from staff and what they could do independently.

People were able to participate in activities to help maintain independence. This included domestic activities such as cooking and cleaning and accessing the community. Comments from people included, “Staff were so good at helping me rehabilitate and if it wasn’t for them, I would not have kept up with my physio exercises.”

Staff told us they supported people to be as independent as they could. This included arranging regular communication with district nurses, to help support people with their ongoing health needs. For example, 1 person’s daily routine had changed. The provider organised referrals and assessments from professionals so the person was able to receive support from other specialists.

Staff identified when people’s independence changed, for example due to long term illness. Staff were able to adjust their approach, enabling people to maintain their choice and control. We saw examples of choices and support offered to people so they could maintain control over their living environment.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

People consistently reported that staff were highly responsive and proactive in meeting their needs, with support plans reviewed and adapted to reflect changing preferences and circumstances. Care records and observations demonstrated a strong, embedded culture of attentive and timely responses. Staff anticipated and recognised when people required support, including during periods of heightened anxiety, and acted immediately to minimise distress and promote emotional wellbeing.

Robust oversight systems were in place, with the management team routinely auditing care records and undertaking observations to ensure support was consistently delivered to a high standard and without delay. This oversight drove continuous improvement and reinforced a shared commitment to responsive, person-centred care.

Staff were skilled and compassionate in responding to people’s emotional and safeguarding needs. For example, they provided sensitive, individualised support to a person experiencing bereavement, helping them to a significant life event in a way that reflected their personal coping style. Where risks were identified, the provider acted swiftly and responsibly, making timely safeguarding referrals to protect people from harm.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. Staff told us they received the support they needed to do their job well.

Staff told us managers were open and they were able to share any concerns they had. Staff were confident managers would act on any concerns they raised. Comments from staff included, “Support is always available.” The registered manager supported staff with adjustments to their working pattern, for example due to being a non-driver or having health conditions. Comments from staff included, “They are very good, if I want to or need to change shifts, the manager will ask someone else to cover” and, “The support we get from management is so good, whether in terms ofwork relatedissues or if I’m not feeling well or something is bothering me, they will support.”

Staff told us there was an inclusive working environment. Spot checks were undertaken by the manager and staff told us this was “Supportive rather than fault finding.” Other comments included, “We all go out for Christmas, we have prizes and team activities.”