HomeCare Reablement Service

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

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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Staff treated people with kindness and respect and supported dignity within a reablement approach. Care records showed staff interacted positively with people during visits, including conversations, reassurance and encouragement, and delivered personal care in a way that maintained privacy and dignity. One person told us, “I welcomed the cups of tea they made and the chats we had.”

People consistently described positive relationships. One person said, “They are so kind and friendly”, and another said, “They are very caring and observant.”

Staff balanced compassionate care with promoting independence. Records showed staff supported people to complete tasks themselves where possible, while remaining attentive to needs such as pain, distress or reduced wellbeing. For example, staff supported people when they were in discomfort and encouraged eating and medication while respecting their decisions.

A person told us, “It was wonderful to have such kind companions that took the time to talk to me and provide me with company during my rehabilitation.”

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Staff treated people as individuals and delivered care that reflected their needs, preferences and circumstances. Staff completed detailed assessments that captured people’s background, medical history, communication needs and support networks, which informed personalised care planning.

People confirmed staff understood and responded to their individual needs. One person said, “they do everything that he asks them to do in a way that suits him.” Another person said staff were “aware of my background and culture and they are very respectful.” A relative said, “The carers provide her with the support that she needs.”

Care records supported this approach. Staff developed individualised care plans with specific goals for mobility, personal care and daily routines, based on people’s abilities and preferences. Staff reviewed plans regularly and adjusted support to reflect changes in needs.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so they had choice and control over their care, treatment and wellbeing.

Staff supported people to regain skills and encouraged them to complete tasks independently rather than providing full assistance.

Staff supported people to prepare meals, mobilise independently, complete personal care and manage medicines. They recorded when support was declined, which showed respect for choice and control. One person said, “With their encouragement I am now able to make my food and drinks which is a miracle.”

Staff worked in partnership with people to co‑produce support plans and agree outcome‑focused goals that reflected individual strengths and needs. This ensured care was personalised and enabled people to make progress. One person said, “The reablement workers helped me achieve the level of independence I needed,” and another described the service as essential for people living alone.

Records showed people were involved in setting and reviewing goals, and support was reduced as independence improved. A relative told us, “The carers encourage [person] to complete daily tasks and don’t just take over so this allows them to maintain a level of independence as they are physically able.” This approach meant outcomes consistently reflected people’s goals and supported their quality of life.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Staff adapted care in response to changes in health and wellbeing and referred people for technology‑enabled care or specialist advice where required.

Care records showed staff monitored changes in health, pain and wellbeing and adjusted support during visits. An on‑call duty system enabled staff to escalate concerns and access guidance outside normal working hours, which supported timely responses to emerging risks.

Care delivery remained flexible. Staff adapted support when people were unwell, declined care or needed additional encouragement. People described this positively; one said staff talked to them when they were unwell, and another highlighted consistent support and reliability during visits.

Monitoring systems, including communication books and multidisciplinary team discussions, supported information sharing across staff and services. A professional described the service as “genuinely person-centred” and confirmed a strength-based approach to responding to people’s needs.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff described a supportive environment with strong teamwork and effective communication. One staff member said, “we feel respected and trusted”, and another described the team as “one big family with good team dynamics.” Another staff member also told us, “I can go to any of my colleagues to ask for support”, which reflected a culture of openness and peer support.

Policies supported staff safety and wellbeing. Lone working arrangements and risk management guidance provided clear processes for managing risks and responding to emergencies. Staff also had access to reasonable adjustments, with processes in place for managers and staff to agree and review adjustments to support safe working and remove barriers where needed.

The provider supported staff wellbeing through access to wider support services. Staff had access to an Employee Assistance Programme (EAP), which provided free, confidential and independent support, including counselling and advice on issues such as workplace pressures, stress and mental health, available 24 hours a day.

The provider also promoted work‑life balance through flexible working arrangements. Staff could request flexible working, which the organisation considered in line with service needs, to support wellbeing, reduce stress and improve retention.

Staff had access to regular supervision, team meetings and communication systems. They described communication as “very good” and said, “things are always dealt with quickly.”

Managers were described as approachable and responsive, and staff reported they could raise concerns openly.