Help at Home Care Service

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

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 68 (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’s care plans included detailed guidance for staff on how to meet people’s specific needs. Staff were only able to access this information on paper-based records available in people’s homes. The provider was in the process of introducing digital care plans and MARs. Staff told us, “A lot of the time I am on the same run and see a lot of the same people, if someone is not quite right, I can pick up on it quickly.” During our home visits, staff used techniques described in people’s care plans while offering support. Regular reviews were held with people to help ensure the care provided continued to meet their needs. People and relatives told us, “I have a care plan in the book, and the carers always check it off when they leave. If I need extra one-off duties done beyond the plan, the carers will do it for me.” and “We have a care plan, and I am privy to it, and it’s kept up to date. The carers will respond to any changes in my relative and always inform me.”

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 service focused on supporting people to live as independently as possible and recognised the value of continuity of care and the importance of building trusting relationships to enable people’s independence. People and relatives told us, “The carers do change, but not every day and I am happy with the continuity”. Another said, “Relative gets the same cluster of carers that rotate, but [relative] knows all of them and we are happy to have the continuity.”

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People did not always have information in a format that was accessible to them to support their understanding. For example, in another language. The provider told us they would put this in place immediately.

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 told us they could contact the office and the managers if they needed to raise an issue and we saw examples of complaints being responded to. The complaints process was available in people’s homes and care staff encouraged and supported people to report anything they were not happy about. Staff told us, “I would ask what they were unhappy with and try and solve it…I would report to the office with the issue that they have raised, and the office will try and resolve it.”

The provider carried out surveys to gather feedback on people’s experiences and the results were collated to reflect what, if any, actions had been taken to improve people’s outcomes.

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

People were supported to access health and social care services as required. One professional told us, “The Manager has good leadership skills and goes above arranging District Nurses visits and requesting incontinence assessments as needed for the person and is extremely conscientious about providing a high level of service.”

Staff had completed training in equality and diversity. We observed staff treating people as unique individuals, using their preferred name.

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 their relatives did not report any concerns in relation to any experience of discrimination and inequality from the service.

Staff told us they knew people well and they showed an awareness of people’s individual needs, their differences, likes, dislikes and preferences.

The provider had an equality and diversity policy. People's care plans were person centred and set out aspects of people's characteristics, beliefs and preferences to ensure people's protected characteristics and needs were respected.

One relative told us, “They have made life for my relative and myself much easier. When they turn up, it’s not like a client, it’s more like friends. There’s warmth and humanity.”

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.
Care planning documentation lacked any information regarding people making important decisions about their life, including end of life care. At the time of the assessment, staff had not completed end of life training. We did not find any impact to people using the service. The provider assured us all staff would complete training in this area.