Embrace Home Care Limited

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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care plans showed that support was centred around the person receiving it, families were involved where appropriate, this was led by the person themselves. Evidence showed that care plans were reviewed regularly.

We saw service reviews which helped to ensure that support continued to meet people’s required needs. One person’s family member told us, “The manager comes round once a month to see if [parent] is still happy, they are an exceptionally fantastic team.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People’s care plans fully reflected their physical, mental, emotional, and social needs.

The service consisted of a relatively small team, so they could offer continuity of care. They said that new members of staff were introduced to people by existing members of staff.

Staff confirmed that they worked flexibly. One told us that if a person needs support for something outside of their usual plan, they will negotiate to make sure that are able to access support that meets their needs. They had recently supported a person to a medical appointment as they were anxious about attending alone.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

We saw that people’s communication preferences were recorded in their care plans. All information available to staff members was on a mobile phone application which was password protected. The training matrix showed that all staff were trained in safe record keeping.

The provider enabled people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment, and support. Staff always involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The provider altered service delivery because of feedback, from changing dates and times of support to better meet need, to altering elements of individual support. One person told us that they wanted a shower instead of a bath each morning, a care plan was altered as a result, and this was communicated to their team.

There were detailed complaints and compliments procedures, both of which had been made available to people receiving support. One person told us how they would go about complaining if they needed to and said that they would expect an action as a result.

The provider completed an annual survey of people who use their service and other stakeholders.

There was good evidence of compliment cards, thank you cards and testimonials from people and their families.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support, and treatment they needed when they needed it.

A staff member told us that they had supported a person to attend a medical appointment that they would usually attend independently, they said, “I think it was comforting for them and reassuring for their family.”

Staff and leaders were attentive and listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality of healthcare outcomes. Staff and leaders actively used this information to provide tailored care, support, and treatment in response to this.

We observed different strategies the provider used to collect information from people and stakeholders to tailor support. From 3-monthly reviews, monthly visits from the registered manager, compliment, and complaint forms to a ‘you said, we did’ form which showed actions completed in response to comments made by people using the service.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future.

Care plans did consider plans for the future and there was work done towards goal planning towards identified outcomes focussed on people remaining as independent as possible. Though due to the type of support people receive from the provider, there was limited planning for end-of-life care.