Aim24 Care Wokingham

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 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 68 (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 ensured that people were at the centre of their care and treatment decisions. Care and support were planned in partnership with individuals, enabling them to make informed choices and helping staff respond appropriately to any changes in their needs.

People’s care plans were personalised and clearly reflected how each person wished to be supported, taking into account their individual likes, dislikes, preferences and routines. Some care plans included meaningful personal detail such as the fact that they enjoy jokes or stories, which helped staff understand what was important to each person and supported more compassionate, individualised care.

The provider demonstrated an understanding of the diverse health and care needs of the people using the service and the local community, which supported the delivery of joined up and flexible care. Staff raised concerns with health and social care professionals when needed, ensuring people received input from the appropriate services in a timely manner.

People reported that staff generally arrived on time for visits, which helped maintain continuity and reliability in the care provided. This consistency meant staff were familiar with people’s routines and could more easily recognise when needs changed. One person said, “There is a[staff]coming to[person]for two years plus,” and explained staff would notice any changes in their[relative’s]condition.

Although people told us continuity had not always been achieved in the past, they reported that this had improved more recently.

Some people told us they did not have copies of their care plans or other documentation from the provider. We discussed this with the registered manager who ensured care plans were issued to the people who had not previously received them. Staff told us they had access to the information they needed to understand people’s communication needs. Staff said care plans contained relevant details that helped them support people to express themselves effectively. The provider also recorded people’s preferences for staff who spoke their preferred language, which supported appropriate matching of staff to people’s needs. The provider had a data security and retention policy in place, outlining how information was stored, protected, and managed.

People were asked for their views in a variety of ways throughout the year, including through surveys, phone calls and home visits. Some people told us they had been asked for feedback, and most said they received regular contact from the office to check they were satisfied with the care provided. People told us that issues they had raised were dealt with appropriately. They said they felt able to contact the office whenever they needed to, and records showed complaints were logged and responded to promptly and efficiently. This helped ensure people felt listened to and involved in shaping their care and the service they received.

The provider ensured people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff took appropriate action when concerns were identified and liaised with external professionals to secure timely interventions. For example, the provider made direct contact with the district nursing team to address catheter related issues, ensuring people received prompt and appropriate clinical support.

People using the service lived with relatives who remained closely involved in their care. The provider worked collaboratively with families, who contacted healthcare professionals themselves where appropriate. This partnership approach ensured people continued to have access to the right healthcare input without delay. The provider also took steps to remove barriers to communication. Staff were matched to people based on their language needs so people could better understand their care, express their preferences and engage in decisions about their support. This reduced communication inequalities and promoted fair access for people whose first language was not English.

Staff and leaders aimed to promote equity in the way care was delivered. People and relatives, we spoke with said they had not experienced discrimination or unequal treatment.

The registered manager and staff team worked together to support people in a way which considered their individual characteristics and needs. The registered manager had an awareness of the diverse backgrounds of people using the service, as well as the diversity within the staff team.

Policies and procedures were in place to guide staff in promoting equality and reducing barriers to care, and training supported staff in understanding these responsibilities.

People were not receiving end-of-life care at the time of the inspection. Staff had received training in end-of-life care and told us they felt confident to support people should these needs arise. The registered manager explained that if a person required end-of-life support, a specific care plan would be created to explore the individual’s wishes, preferences, and priorities. Although one of the current care plans included details of a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) form and where it was stored, it did not go further to outline the person’s broader future wishes, advance care planning, or preferences for end-of-lifecare. We did not see evidence that staff had supported people to explore or discuss planning ahead or making informed decisions about important future changes. As a result, the service was only partially meeting the expectation of planning for the future in a person centred and forward looking way.