Trust Homecare Solution South Suffolk 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 service met people’s needs.   This is the first inspection for this service. This key question has been rated 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 service 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. The registered manager provided examples of when people’s needs had significantly changed and how they had supported people’s wishes to remain at home instead of having to go to hospital. This included advocating for the person, consulting with external health and social care professionals to get the support needed that fell outside the provider’s capabilities, so that people could remain in their own homes.

The service 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 registered manager worked collaboratively with external stakeholders to address people’s changing and diverse needs. Examples included referrals to district nurses, speech and language therapists and supporting care reviews for people when loved ones were away.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment, and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. The registered manager and other senior leaders formed part of the hands-on care team. The registered manager told us that because they worked alongside staff on a regular basis, they had regular informal conversations that resulted in immediate actions to improve care for people. People and relatives confirmed this. People reported that they felt the manager was approachable and helpful and gave examples when they had acted upon concerns raised.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment, and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. The registered manager and other senior leaders formed part of the hands-on care team. The registered manager told us that because they worked alongside staff on a regular basis, they had regular informal conversations that resulted in immediate actions to improve care for people. People and relatives confirmed this. People reported that they felt the manager was approachable and helpful and gave examples when they had acted upon concerns raised.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support, and treatment they needed when they needed it. The manager changed staff rotas to accommodate people’s appointments. One relative said, “They are really flexible when I need them to be.”

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. People and their relatives did not report any concerns in relation to any experience of discrimination and inequality. Leaders demonstrated an awareness of protected characteristics and would make reasonable adjustments to support equity in experience and outcomes. This included advocating with other health professionals on people’s behalf to access health support.

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. People had care plans in place which detailed their choices and wishes. This included supporting discussions documentation around advance decisions not to go to hospital if they became unwell and identifying multiagency care planning to support these choices.