Aurora Home Care Ltd

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. This key question was previously rated good and remains good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 65 (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. Interactions between staff and people were always dignified, with evident humour and warmth. People consistently told us that staff were patient, attentive and caring. Support was never rushed and staff ensured people were content and relaxed. Staff recognised the importance of the little things that made people feel at home. One person said, “The staff are really nice and that [staff name] is a right pain (said in jest).”This was representative of the jovial nature of the relationship people had built up with trusted staff.

The provider did not always ensure people were supported as individuals. For example, people shared care plans, which was contrary to promoting independence, choice and dignity. This had been done for the convenience and ease of the service, rather than the needs of people who used the service. The provider assured us they would rectify this immediately.

People and relatives told us they were involved in care planning and reviews, and staff responded to people’s preferences regarding personal care, socialisation, hobbies and shopping, for example.

The provider always promoted choice in day-to-day care. Whilst people who lived in the same house sometimes did the same activities, this was their choice. They also undertook a range of individualised activities and interests which were personalised to them. The provider was respectful of their varied interests and ensured people enjoyed a quality of life, specific to them.

People said staff encouraged them to do what they could for themselves and respected their decisions, such as when to go out, and when to have meals or showers. One person told us, “It’s nice to come home after work. They help me.”

Staff worked flexibly to accommodate appointment times and preferences, and relatives confirmed that support was offered as planned. Care records lacked detail about what mattered most to people, such as aspirations and what a good day looked like, which limited opportunities for fully person-centred planning. Staff mitigated this gap by forming positive bonds and building rapport with people.

The provider responded promptly to people’s needs and acted in emergencies and when things happened unexpectedly. People described staff contacting GPs and calling ambulances when required. Staff accompanied people to regular hospital and other appointments.

While daily notes varied in quality and some care plans lacked detail, people told us they felt reassured that staff would respond if something went wrong. People gave generally positive feedback about the support staff offered.

One external professional told us (regarding a staffing situation a service user was not happy with), “The registered manager addressed the issue promptly and decisively. This was efficient and minimised any distress.”

The provider supported staff wellbeing and development, although some improvements were needed. Staff had access to online training and shadowing, and supervisors carried out spot checks and supervisions. People and relatives praised staff morale and commitment. One staff member told us, “They’re very flexible with me and the office is always there for support.”

Staff meetings and check-ins were in place, and the culture was described as open and approachable by staff we spoke with. However, gaps remained in face-to-face training and formal feedback processes, which the provider told us they would address through planned improvements.