Home Instead Senior Care

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 the same. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 82 (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. Staff decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. They demonstrated a strong commitment to person centred care, ensuring care plans were developed in collaboration with people and relatives and reflected their unique preferences, life histories and goals. The registered manager told us how the service had supported a person to start baking again. Staff spent time building a rapport with the person, planning a shopping trip for ingredients and offering physical support where needed. They said, “The client baked cakes again for the first time in years, a moment filled with pride, joy, and a renewed sense of identity”.

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. The provider worked alongside other healthcare professionals to ensure continuity of care for people. Where people had additional health needs which required using healthcare equipment, the provider had liaised with relevant healthcare partners to provide training and support. One healthcare professional told us “Staff are good at picking up on issues and getting things resolved, they are fully aware of people’s needs”. Staff told us they knew people well. The provider organised a monthly lunch club at a local church hall which they told us many people attend with their support network or care professionals accompany them.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. The provider had a complaints policy in place. Staff recorded complaints and concerns received and documented actions taken in response to these. All people and relatives we spoke with told us they knew where to raise a complaint and would speak directly with the registered manager if needed. The manager responded to any complaints or concerns made. One person told us, “We made a complaint about an error that nobody told us about. The complaint was investigated, and appropriate action taken. We were happy with the outcome. Smaller concerns are sorted out and I email the registered manager, and they email me back. The relations are good with them. It’s always better to talk”. The service gathered feedback from people and relatives which was analysed to identify where improvements could be made.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. The provider had a complaints policy in place. Staff recorded complaints and concerns received and documented actions taken in response to these. All people and relatives we spoke with told us they knew where to raise a complaint and would speak directly with the registered manager if needed. The manager responded to any complaints or concerns made. One person told us, “We made a complaint about an error that nobody told us about. The complaint was investigated, and appropriate action taken. We were happy with the outcome. Smaller concerns are sorted out and I email the registered manager, and they email me back. The relations are good with them. It’s always better to talk”. The service gathered feedback from people and relatives which was analysed to identify where improvements could be made.

Staff supported people to access care, support and treatment when people needed it. This was evidenced in people’s care plans. The service worked in partnership with other professionals to meet people’s needs We saw people had access to services additionally to what was provided by Home Instead. People had access to emergency care as well as other support, care and treatment, for example the district nurse. Staff worked to upholdpeople’s legal rights and autonomy to enable people from different cultural backgrounds to use the service.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. The service supported people who may face inequalities due to speaking a different language and having a cognitive impairment. Where this had been identified, staff who were able speak the same language were assigned to the person, which enabled them to express themselves freely and be understood during moments of disorientation or heightened emotional need. Staff had undertaken training to ensure they understood how to treat people equitably, the provider also had a policy in place.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. There were systems in place to record people’s advanced wishes. These included people’s choices regarding resuscitation in the event of requiring emergency treatment. Staff supported people with anticipatory care planning, involving palliative teams, families, and spiritual advisors. This included honouring cultural wishes, and planning for place-of-care preferences.Staff had received comprehensive training in end-of-life care.