Daisychain Homecare Services

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 changed to requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.

This service scored 61 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices as information in people’s care plans was generic and task orientated. People’s preferences were not always recorded for how they wanted their care to be delivered in line with their specific needs. Guidance to staff was limited and did not provide any individualised information on people’s personal preferences and routines which was necessary to ensure person centred care was promoted.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. People and their relatives told us they knew how to share feedback about the service and they were provided with regular opportunities to do so. However, when people had complained or given feedback, this had not always led to improvements.At the time of our inspection, the provider had recently sent out a questionnaire asking people their opinions on the care and support provided. We reviewed the initial responses to the survey and found them to be complimentary and positive about the care provided. People told us they had been provided with information on how to complain, we received mixed opinions on how people felt their complaints were acted upon. One person told us, “When I’ve asked about the times (of visits), they have said they can’t alter them. I don’t want to be always complaining, but I would still like the times changed.” And another person told us, “They dealt with my complaint, when I called in, somebody senior called me back and apologised. I was satisfied.” We reviewed the complaints the service had received and found the majority were about the times of calls. The provider had an action plan in place on the steps they were taking to improve this, which included improving how people’s visits were scheduled and monitored.

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

Leaders did not always actively listen to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. This meant people’s care was not always tailored in response to this. The service was supporting people living with dementia, we found the care plans in place referenced this, however they did not provide any information on how this presented for each person or any adjustments that staff may need to make to adapt the care they provided.

People were not always 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. We received mixed opinions from people on how the service supported their plans for the future. Several people told us they had not been asked about this and other people told us about the plans they had in place. We reviewed the information in people’s care plans and found copies of important decisions people had made about their care and treatment at the end of their lives was held in the providers office, therefore it was not clear if these records were in date and accurate or in line with the persons wishes.