LJM - Homecare Lincoln

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

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 treated people with kindness and compassion and generally respected their privacy and dignity. Many people and relatives spoke warmly about staff and described caring relationships. Staff said they considered how they would want their own family members to be treated. There were examples of staff visiting people in their own time when people felt lonely or needed additional support.

Relatives described particularly compassionate care at the end of people’s lives. Staff supported both the person and those important to them and maintained relationships with some families after care had ended. One relative said, "I would recommend them to anyone, they were brilliant."

Most people felt their dignity and preferences were respected. However, some described occasions when individual staff appeared rushed, distracted or did not communicate respectfully. This meant people did not always experience the same standard of compassionate care from every member of staff.

The provider treated people as individuals and planned care around their needs, preferences and what was important to them. Care plans reflected people’s personal histories, routines and how they preferred to receive support. Most staff understood people’s individual needs and people were involved in decisions about their care. Religious, cultural and gender preferences were recorded and respected.

There were examples where support was adapted around very specific individual needs. This included detailed routines for people whose wellbeing could be affected when care was not provided in the way they expected. One person said, "I am quite independent myself; I only ask them to do the things I can’t. They will always ask me."

People’s strengths and independence were considered when planning their support, with care adjusted as their needs and abilities changed.

The provider promoted people’s independence and supported them to have choice and control over their care. People’s individual beliefs and preferences were considered as part of their care planning. Care plans described what people could do independently and where they needed support. There were positive examples where people had increased their independence and required less support over time. People were generally involved in decisions about their care and how they wanted staff to support them. One person said, "Yes, I make the decisions." Greater consistency of staff would help ensure people’s independence, choices and preferred routines were supported at each visit.

The provider understood people’s needs and staff responded promptly when people needed additional or urgent support. Staff recognised changes in people’s needs and took action when they became unwell or distressed. In emergencies, staff sought appropriate medical support and remained with people until emergency services took over, including accompanying them to hospital when needed.

People and relatives gave examples of staff responding appropriately following falls or illness. A relative said, "A few times [my family member] has fallen and I've had to call an ambulance and the staff have assisted and they are very helpful."

Care plans included information about people’s communication needs and how staff should support them when they were anxious or distressed. This helped staff understand how to respond in ways that reduced people’s discomfort and reassured them.

The provider supported staff wellbeing and enabled staff to deliver person centred care.

Staff generally described positive relationships with the registered managers. The provider supported staff with health needs and considered how these could be safely managed at work. Staff had access to supervision and opportunities to discuss their wellbeing and development.

However, some staff said they did not always feel safe at work. There was evidence concerns had been followed up, but some staff felt action was not always effective or they were not told about the outcome.