Private Home Care UK Limited (Leicester)

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 inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 79 (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 was exceptional at making sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices, with consideration to their protected characteristics, and developed in partnership with people, how to respond to any changes in people’s needs.

The person-centred approach towards people’s care was at the heart of the service provided. The provider’s process of identifying and matching staff to people with consideration to the protected characteristics as defined by the Equality Act, ensured people’s needs were met. People were supported by a culturally diverse staff team who understood their cultural and religious needs and were able to converse in people’s preferred language. Many staff were multi-lingual and communicated with people in several languages, which included Gujarati, Hindu, Punjabi Urdu.

People and their family members spoke of staff’s ability to meet their needs, with consideration to language, religious and cultural needs, which included office-based staff. We heard staff who worked in the office speaking on the telephone with people in their preferred language which demonstrated the commitment of the provider to meet people’s needs through effective communication. A family member told us, “I would recommend the service. I value their service and the carers. They have very good communication with elders.”

People and family members were fully involved in decisions around their care, which included their involvement in regular reviews about their care needs. A person told us, “I have a care plan, a lady came from the company when I first started to see what I needed, and its being reviewed next week due to known and planned changes in response to my health.”

People’s care records were developed and written to support person-centred care. They emphasised what was important to the person and the role of staff in the delivery of care in line with people’s expectations and needs. Staff were knowledgeable as to people’s needs, and the importance of providing care with consideration to people’s cultural and religious 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 and staff worked well with healthcare professionals, and others involved in people’s care, to ensure people received continuity of care from everyone involved. This included where people had support from other care companies or received visits from health care professionals. A member of staff told us they worked waking nights in partnership with another agency; they told us this worked well and there was never any conflict between the two agencies.

Positive and supportive relationships developed between staff, the people they cared for and their family members facilitated the provision of good quality care and outcomes, this in part was achieved as the people received care from a consistent team of staff who know them well. Staff told us they completed daily notes and reported any changes in people’s health or care needs to office-based staff, their line manager or manager.

The registered manager told us they maintained strong communication links with health and social care professionals, including district nurses, GP’s, occupational therapists, and social workers. In addition, they liaised with pharmacists for support with medication, and mental health and community teams. The provider considered unpaid carers and family members as key partners, recognising their insight into the person’s life history and daily routines.

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

The provider was aware of the Accessible Information Standard and where required was able to provide information in a format which considered people’s communication needs. The provider upon request, was able to provide key information, such as the service user guide and quality assurance feedback surveys in several languages as well as in easy read for those with a learning disability

People and family members spoke of effective communication, both in terms of staff being able to converse in their preferred language, but also with regards to good communications with office-based staff, including the registered manager.

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.

Everyone we spoke with was knowledgeable as to how to raise a complaint and were equally confident any concerns would be responded to. A person told us, “Not really had any complaints. Staff do exactly what they should. I can’t fault them one bit.” A family member said, “I’ve not made any complaints and am happy with the service.”

The provider sought people’s views and that of family members via an annual survey, and through telephone interviews. The annual feedback surveys were analysed, and any areas of improvement resulted in the development of an action plan. The analysis of the most recent survey evidenced a high level of satisfaction across all areas. Not everyone we spoke with had yet received a survey. A family member told us, “They have asked our views, and I filled in the survey.” A person said “I don’t think there’s been any survey. The office staff have phoned me to ask if I’m happy and if everything is okay.”

The provider had a complaint and compliments policy and procedure. The registered manager informed us they had not received any complaints from people or their family members.

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

The provider had systems and processes that monitored people’s care and support needs, including health conditions. People’s care plans and records confirmed how people’s care and support was provided, monitored and reviewed. Staff in some instances supported people to attend health appointments. A person said, “I have a care plan which details my health. Staff regularly take me to hospital appointments, and my plan is updated if needed.”

Staff were vigilant in noting any changes in people’s health and notified the appropriate person, including a health care professional, the registered manager and family member, where appropriate. A family member told us, “Carers saw my [relative] was not well and they advised me to call an ambulance.”

The provider operated an out of hours and on call facility, to ensure support was always available. People, family members and staff spoke positively of the out of hours service. A family member said, “The office staff answer me straight away and are helpful.” A staff member said, “There’s always someone available 24/7, they always answer the phone if you need them.”

The provider had contingency plans in the event of an emergency. For example, staff absence, bad weather and medical emergencies to ensure care was never missed. This was facilitated through a 24 hour on call system managed by the management team, with all care staff having access to an emergency contact number supported by guidance on how to escalate concerns.

The registered manager informed us they were committed to ensuring equitable access to care and support for all individuals, identifying barriers which may prevent people from receiving good quality and person-centred care. The provider produced a newsletter, which provided information about services in the local area. For example, community and cultural events in Leicester, and information and addresses of advocacy services and community centres, which reflected the diverse needs of people.

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.

People and relatives, we spoke with said they were treated fairly. Staff completed training in equality and diversity to understand and reduce inequalities or prejudices that could affect people’s needs being met.

The provider and management team and staff were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage different groups of people in accessing care, treatment and support. The provider recognised barriers including language, culture and mobility. The provider targeted its resources and time in promoting and maintaining equality, diversity and inclusion across the service.

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’s care records, where applicable, detailed their advanced wishes regarding treatment if their health deteriorated, which included a DNACPR (a document which records people’s advanced wishes should they stop breathing) and a ReSPECT form (a document which records people’s advanced wishes regarding treatment in the event they unable to do so).

The registered manager advised us end-of-life discussions were approached with sensitivity and respect. Conversations took place when the person was ready and was led by their wishes and recorded in their care plan. The provider told us they worked closely with GP’s and palliative care teams. Staff had received training on end-of life care, which took into consideration communication and emotional support.