DK Home Support

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 ensured people were at the centre of their care and support. Care plans reflected individual needs, preferences, and goals, and were regularly reviewed with input from people and their families. Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of person-centred principles and promoted independence wherever possible. People felt respected and involved in decisions about their care. A person said, “My son does the food, and carers give it to me. No problem.”

People experienced continuity of care from familiar staff, which helped build trust and reduce anxiety. Rotas were planned to minimise unnecessary changes, and electronic monitoring systems ensured timely visits. Staff worked collaboratively with health professionals and relatives to maintain joined-up care. Relatives praised the consistency of carers, especially for people living with dementia. A relative said, “Time keeping is very good. If there is a new carer, they (the provider) bring them and introduce them to me and [Person].”

The service met the Accessible Information Standard by offering information in formats suited to individual needs, such as large print or easy-read documents. People received clear explanations about their care, and staff were trained to check understanding and consent before providing support. A person told us, “They gave me all the information I needed.”

Complaints were managed promptly and respectfully, with outcomes and learning shared to improve practice. Staff confirmed complaints were logged, investigated, and responded to within set timescales. People felt listened to and could raise concerns easily. A person said, "I complained and they were very responsive."

Care was available when needed, including out-of-hours support. The service maintained an on-call system and electronic alerts to prevent missed visits. Policies and care plans showed reasonable adjustments for accessibility and emergency planning. People and relatives confirmed they could contact staff easily and felt reassured about emergency arrangements.

The provider worked to overcome barriers to care by offering flexible support and training staff in equality, diversity, and inclusion. Staff received mandatory training on these topics and supervision and reviews to reinforce inclusive practice. People were treated fairly and felt respected. Feedback from relatives and professionals indicated people were supported to achieve positive outcomes and maintain independence. A relative said, “I would recommend as I don’t feel I am just a number.”

End of life planning was approached sensitively and documented clearly when relevant. Conversations were held in private, and care plans reflected people’s end of life wishes and decisions. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act and best-interest principles, ensuring decisions were made lawfully and with appropriate involvement of families and advocates. A staff member commented, “I have been able to provide the care needed for a client to stay in the comfort of their own home when they have wanted that choice.”