Raynsford Domiciliary Care

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 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 decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.
People’s care plans were detailed and focused on things and people who were important them and reflected how they wish to be supported. For example, one person said they liked to go to the gym, swimming, archery, and boxing.

Whilst we found most people were supported to carry out activities of their choice; we found one person’s activity planner did not align with their social needs care plans and had not been reviewed with them. The person told us they had not recently been able to carry out their favourite hobby of swimming. This was discussed with the service manager who told us the activity had been difficult to arrange but would revisit this with the person.

The provider had assisted people to understand their rights and new support arrangements under a supported living framework. People had tenancy agreements in place and had been supported to understand their tenancy rights and were provided with an easy read version. The provider agreed to consider ways of enhancing people’s understanding of being a tenant to enable them to understand their rights and enable people to exercise real control of their homes. The provider stated it had taken some time to change the culture of the service but were confident staff understood their role in supporting people to achieve their goals and empower people to be fully involved in their day to day and bigger life decisions. The provider website stated, “Life is nothing without aspiration. Supported living is all about helping our clients to aspire and achieve their personal goals in a safe space.”

A small number of people explained there was some conflict between the people they shared their house with. However, the provider was proactive in ensuring people were involved in making decisions about any new people who may move into their supported living house. Where needed, reasonable adjustments had been made to people’s houses to enable them to live as independently as possible.

People were given opportunities to feedback about their supported living houses, the support they received and make suggestions through individual and tenancy meetings.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities. Staff maintained good contact with families and health care professionals, to ensure people’s care was joined-up, flexible, supported choice and continuity

Staff understood people’s care needs and worked well with multiple external health and social care professionals to ensure people needs were consistently met.
 

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People received information in a format they could understand.
People were supported to use different communication methods to help them to communicate and express their feelings and wishes, such as, communication boards and audio devices.

Information of interest, such as places of interest and safety information was displayed around people’s houses in a format people could understand.

We observed staff adapting their approach according to people’s preferred ways of communicating. However, records of people’s individual preferred ways of communicating could be clearer for staff. For example, one person’s care plan stated they used Makaton (a communication system that uses a combination of speech, signs, and symbols to support communication), but not all staff had been trained in Makaton. When raised with the service manager, we were told the person used their own variation of Makaton which staff were aware of.
 

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 were given regular opportunities to speak to the service managers and staff, such as, regular meetings with their key workers. They told us they felt listened to and were involved in making decisions about the care and support they received. Accessible and easy read information on how to file a complaint was available in each house, although it wasn't prominently displayed in one house.

People and their relatives felt confident any concerns or complaints would be taken seriously and treated compassionately.
 

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

People were provided with easy read guidance on screening and health checking to help them make informed decisions about their care. People had health action plans and hospital passports to help staff monitor their wellbeing and to attend routine appointments.

Staff were aware of people’s human rights and the importance of considering the needs of people with different protected characteristics and adapting their approach accordingly.
 

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

People told us they felt they were treated fairly and had a better understanding of their rights to equality and their human rights. For example, some people were supported to complete workbooks on safeguarding and how to manage their finances. These were tailored to the abilities of people using the service and supported them to be more independent.
 

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.

People did not require any support with end of life care at the time of our assessment. However, the provider was aware some people had age-related health and social care needs with specific challenges associated with their learning disability. They recognised further work was needed to facilitate discussions with people about their future health needs and preferences as an ongoing process. Easy read information was available to help people understand the aging process and end of life.