Home Instead Central Hemel Hempstead & Chilterns

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.

People told us their care was provided in line with their wishes. A relative told us, “[Relative] has a bedtime routine that staff follow.” Another relative told us, “[Relative] is very independent. [They] enjoy their (staff’s) company, they all respect [them].”

Care plans documented the way in which care should be provided and gave clear information to staff about people’s needs, preferences, lifestyle and included consideration of people’s protected characteristics and reference to their cultural 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.

People received coordinated and consistent care. A person told us, “They (staff) are all spot on. If anything is amiss, they know and are very good at noticing.”

From the point of referral to the service, the provider and staff demonstrated a joined-up approach between themselves, people, relatives and health professionals. People, in the main, were supported by a consistent group of staff. However, some people felt this was an area where the service could improve.
 

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

People and relatives confirmed that communication with the provider was effective and they received all the information needed.

Care plans reviewed confirmed people’s communication needs were assessed at the point of referral and considered at their care reviews. This included any requirements for adaptation to communication that should be considered, such as hearing loss or visual impairment.
 

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 confirmed they felt confident in the provider taking appropriate actions should they raise a concern or complaint. A person told us, “I never had (made a complaint). Very happy and I feel that I can approach them (provider).” A relative told us, “We can ring the office. They are perfectly pleasant and they do the right things. Very professional.”

Formal reviews were undertaken. This included a satisfaction survey for all people, relatives and staff. The provider used the feedback received to drive improvements. Where we saw that additional feedback had been received, including complaints and compliments, this were shared with staff to inform their practice.
 

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

No concerns relating to people’s ability to access the service were found. There were consistent arrangements for the planning and delivery of care for everyone, without discrimination.

People’s care was arranged with them; at a time they preferred. Care provision was planned in a structured way to ensure staff could provide care to people reliably and as planned.
 

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 felt they were treated equally.

There were no concerns or differences identified of how people received or experienced the service. The provider understood the potential barriers that may be faced in relation to equity in outcomes and ensured that their policies regarding equality and diversity were adhered to.
 

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 had been involved in the development of their care plans, alongside their relatives and with input from healthcare professionals, where appropriate. Opportunities to discuss future decisions at the time of assessment and reviews were in place. This helped to ensure people’s future wishes, including end of life wishes, were documented where they were happy to discuss this.