Dixon Dunn Care Solihull Limited Also known as Home Instead - Solihull

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 they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care was tailored to individual needs, with regular reviews ensuring support remained appropriate and responsive to change. Care plans contained a good level of person-centred detail and showed staff worked closely with people and their families to capture their wishes, preferences, and feelings. People and those important to them were actively involved in decisions about their care, ensuring they remained at the centre of all support.

Care plans took a holistic approach, reflecting key aspects of people’s lives such as daily routines, personal preferences, and faith, including how individuals practised their beliefs. They also outlined people’s goals and aspirations, with clear guidance for staff on how to support these outcomes. The service remained flexible, adjusting care packages where needed to align with people’s lifestyles and changing needs.

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.

The provider promoted continuity of care through consistent staffing and team-based allocation, with systems in place to manage absences and minimise disruption. One relative told us, “My relative usually has the same carers which means that my relative knows them and is comfortable with them, which is reassuring for us.” The provider had a diverse workforce with strong knowledge of the local community supported inclusive care, and staff were carefully matched to people’s needs and interests to deliver tailored support. Staff received training in key areas such as dementia and manual handling. The service treated people as individuals, ensuring care reflected their needs and preferences, and worked effectively with external agencies to provide coordinated, joined-up support.

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

Information was effectively communicated to staff through digital systems, emails, and meetings, with people and their families were able to access care records where appropriate.

The service met the requirements of the Accessible Information Standard by identifying, recording, flagging, sharing and meeting the information and communication needs of people with a disability or sensory loss.

Information was provided in accessible formats, including large print and alternative options such as other languages or Braille when required.

Care plans detailed people’s communication needs, including sight, hearing, speech, and any sensory requirements, such as the use of glasses or hearing aids. Staff were trained in a range of communication methods and adapted their approach to meet people’s individual preferences, ensuring people were involved in decisions about their care. Multilingual staff supported people whose first language was not English, and all information was stored securely in line with data protection requirements.

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 their relatives understood how to make a complaint and felt confident doing so. The registered manager responded promptly and worked in partnership with families to plan and review care, supporting a joined-up and responsive approach. A “You said, we did” process clearly recorded actions taken in response to feedback, demonstrating how this was used to improve outcomes and strengthen governance. One relative told us “Someone from the office is coming out to hear what I think about the service I am getting and how things are going. I have to say that I am very happy with the service I am receiving.”

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

The provider considered equitable access to care, ensuring people’s needs could be safely met before accepting new packages. People had access to external healthcare professionals to support their wellbeing, with staff assisting attendance at appointments where needed. Policies on equality, diversity and inclusion were in place, and staff received relevant training to support fair and inclusive care. Relatives were involved in decision-making, and staff respected people’s choices and preferences. Managers were accessible outside of office hours, and care plans reflected people’s mobility needs, including support with moving and handling equipment.

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.

The provider promoted equality, diversity and inclusion, ensuring people received fair and personalised care that respected their individual needs, beliefs, and identity. Staff were guided by clear policies and training, supporting inclusive practice and protecting people from discrimination.

People were supported to remain active and maintain their independence, which improved their wellbeing and quality of life. Relatives confirmed people had greater opportunities and enjoyed a range of activities. The service also demonstrated a commitment to protecting staff, with decisions made to decline care packages where risks of discrimination could not be safely managed, reflecting a culture that valued both people and staff.

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 supported people to plan for significant life changes, including end of life care where required. Peoples end of life wishes were recorded in the care plans and reviewed. The registered manager confirmed that specific detailed end of life care plans would be developed to reflect people’s wishes, including consideration of their religious and cultural needs, demonstrating a sensitive and proactive approach.

Records clearly evidenced people’s involvement in care planning and reviews, including their preferences, decisions, and any Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) arrangements, recorded while they had capacity to do so. Staff maintained clear, accessible records to support future decision-making if needs or wishes changed.

At the time of assessment, no one was receiving end of life care. However, the provider was strengthening this area by developing additional training, staff guidance, and information packs to support people and their families to understand and plan for end-of-life care.