Jireh Homecare

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

Good: This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 71 (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’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.
People’s needs were assessed before their care package began to ensure the provider could meet their needs safely and effectively within their own homes. Assessments considered people’s physical health, mental wellbeing, mobility, communication needs, and any risks associated with providing care in a home environment. Environmental risks were also identified so appropriate support could be planned.
Care plans were developed from these assessments and provided guidance for care staff on how to support people in line with their individual needs, preferences, and daily routines. This helped ensure care was delivered in a personalised and consistent way by different members of staff. However, we found that some care plans lacked sufficient detail and were not always fully comprehensive. In these cases, information about how care should be delivered was limited, which could make it more difficult for staff particularly those unfamiliar with the person to provide consistent, person centred support. The provider was perceptive to our advice to strengthen the level of detail within care plans to ensure they clearly reflect people’s assessed needs, preferences, and routines, leaving no room for misinterpretation and supporting safe, consistent care delivery.
People and, where appropriate, their relatives were involved in the assessment process and were supported to express their views about the care they received. This promoted a person centred approach and helped ensure care reflected people’s wishes and supported their independence.
Assessments and care plans were reviewed and updated when people’s needs changed, helping to ensure staff had access to current information to support people safely in their own homes. Staff understood the importance of following care plans and told us they could access the information they needed to carry out their roles effectively.
 

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

Care staff had received appropriate training to support them in delivering effective care and treatment. This included training relevant to people’s individual needs, such as moving and handling, infection prevention and control, medicines management, and food hygiene. Staff demonstrated an understanding of how to apply this training in practice to support people safely and effectively in their own homes.

Majority of people’s care plans reviewed provided guidance for staff to follow when delivering care and treatment. The provider used ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make sure people were provided with the correct level of care and support.

The provider worked with other professionals, such as healthcare services, to help ensure people received coordinated and effective care. This supported positive outcomes for people and helped ensure care and treatment reflected best practice.

People and their relatives told us they were happy with how the provider supported people. One person told us, “I am involved in my care plan someone comes and goes through everything.”

Staff were knowledgeable about people’s cultural dietary needs and were provided training and guidance on how to prepare food.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

Staff communicated with one another using the electronic systems and phones to ensure any updates relating to people's needs were shared without delay. Where needed, referrals had been made to other agencies for support. For example, they liaised with district nurses’ doctors and occupational therapists for support and guidance to meet people’s needs.

Communication between management and staff teams was well established and effective. Information was shared appropriately through structured handovers, team meetings, supervision and written records, ensuring continuity and consistency of care. Staff report feeling informed and supported by colleagues and managers.

Staff spoke positively about team working and continuity of care. One staff member told us, “We are assigned specific geographical areas, which supports continuity of care. People get to know staff really well, and we can cover quickly for each other if the need arises.” Another staff member said, “We work as a team with lots of support and reassurance from managers. I love working for the service.”

Managers described systems in place to share information effectively with relatives, people and carers, ensuring key messages and updates were not missed.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

People’s care calls were provided by a small, stable core group of staff who knew them well. This enabled staff to quickly identify if a person was unwell or not themselves.

People were supported to access health professionals if needed and some people were able to independently contact them if they needed to.

People were encouraged to maintain a balanced diet, stay physically active, and engage in meaningful activities that supported both physical and mental wellbeing. Risks to health were identified, assessed, and managed appropriately, enabling people to live safely while maintaining independence. Referrals where appropriate people were supported to access GP, dentist or occupational therapy.

Feedback from people using the service and their relatives was positive. People told us they felt supported, listened to, and involved in decisions about their care and support.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

When people’s needs were assessed, it was agreed how many care calls people would need regarding staff support to provide care and monitor their health conditions. Staff supported people to access healthcare services such as GPs, dentists, opticians, and specialist services when required.

The service used electronic systems for their care plans and care monitoring to ensure calls were completed on time and people received calls to support them at the agreed times. The compliance manager explained how ‘red flags’ appeared on the system to alert or prompt staff if care was imminently due and had not been provided. Staff were able to see these flags on the electronic devices they used which helped to prompt them to ensure the care was provided.

Staff told us how the service is flexible if people’s needs changed. One staff member said, “We are very accessible to people and families because we see them daily. This gives us lots of opportunity to check how things are going and to make changes if they are needed. So, if something isn’t working or isn’t quite right, people will tell us and we can report to the managers to change it.” For example, if people want their call at a different time to attend a medical appointment.

The provider did not always tell people about their rights around consent and did not always respect their rights when delivering care and treatment.

Staff confirmed they received training in The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), to help them understand the importance of obtaining consent before delivering care, support or treatment. A staff member told us, “I always seek consent from people, it is important to communicate with [people] to ensure I get consent before I do anything.”

People’s capacity to make decisions was assessed, and records of these assessments were retained within their care files. Where people were assessed as lacking the mental capacity to make specific decisions, the provider worked with relatives and others, where appropriate, to ensure decisions were made in the person’s best interests. Staff demonstrated an understanding of, and worked in line with, the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), which supports and promotes people’s rights to make their own decisions wherever possible.

Mental Capacity Act (MCA) assessments had been completed; however, did not always contain the relevant information Mental Capacity Act (MCA) assessments and best interest decisions were completed by the local authority social workers prior to care commencing care

The rm was responsive to the feedback and arranged for records to be updated. his now includes confirmation that Mental Capacity Act assessments and Best Interests decisions completed by social workers are shared with the provider prior to the commencement of care. This ensures the service has clear information about people’s capacity and consent to care, and that no care package is started without the appropriate documentation in place. This action supports safer, lawful and more person‑centred care planning.

The provider produced more robust MCA and Best Interests documentation, which was clearly decision‑specific and reflected individual circumstances. Completed examples of the updated documentation were shared with the inspector during the inspection, demonstrating a positive and proactive approach to improvement. While further embedding of these practices was required, the provider showed a willingness and ability to respond constructively to feedback.