First Choice Home 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 good.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People felt their care needs were being met and felt they were in control of their care. People and those important to them told us they were involved in the care planning process. Staff told us examples of how they supported people in a person-centred way and staff knew the people they were supporting well. Care plans were person centred and gave a good insight to how that person was, their background and likes and dislikes.

The service manager told us they organised staff to work in specific geographical area which helped with continuity for people and staff travelling times. Most staff liked their rotas and knew the people they looked after and their preferences well. However, some staff did tell us that they did not feel consulted about additional care hours being added to their rotas when there was cover needed.

Records showed people’s care provision was kept to regular staff where possible and that care plans were reviewed to ensure they were still meeting people’s needs.

All people we spoke with told us they knew the procedure for raising a concern or complaint to the service. Family were given access to the electronic records and people consented to this within their care plan. The service had an information pack that they gave to individuals at the start of the service and could be given in a format that suited them such as large print or easy read. Additionally, the service manager told us they had conducted an assessment with picture cards and ‘yes’ and ‘no’ cards to support an individual’s communication needs.

People we spoke with understood how and who to complain to and knew where to find the procedure to follow if they were unsatisfied with the outcome of their complaint. People were involved in reviewing their care plans and this was done regularly. The service informed us that they request feedback surveys to be completed from people using the service. People who use the service participated within this, but the service did not analyse and reflect on the feedback given to learn and improve the service. The service manager told us they would analyse and act on future feedback from surveys. We found complaints that had been made to the service were acknowledged, however the service did not follow their complaints procedure and were unable to demonstrate that complaints had undergone a thorough investigation. The service had also received compliments that the service shared with the care team. Staff felt that their concerns around their working hours were not always listened to and it could take a length of time before any visible action took place around their concerns. Staff felt the office always took on board concerns around people who used the service in a timely manner.

Staff expressed that they were confident in the quality assurance staff members to put referrals through to GPs, district nurses or other healthcare professionals if required. Staff told us quality assurance also informed families of concerns and escalated matters to the service manager if appropriate. Care plans reflected other healthcare professionals involved with individuals care and their contact details. Care plans also highlighted people’s communication needs.

We requested feedback from partners, who have worked with the service, about the working relationship, and we received one response who referred us to the local authority review of the service which was a positive report. We received no concerns from partners.

People were provided with an on-call service for people to contact outside of usual office hours if they needed any support. However, feedback from staff was that this on-call service can often be hard to access.

Staff told us how they treated people equally and without discrimination. Staff told us they would report any concerns to management.

Records showed mandatory training was in place for equality and diversity for all staff. Policies were in place to support this training.

Staff we spoke with assured us that they were familiar with people's 'Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation' (DNACPR) records or RESPECT forms and the importance of them. Care plans stated where the location of these were within a person’s home clearly. This meant staff could inform medical professionals of people’s resuscitation wishes if a medical emergency was to occur.

Staff told us they were not currently supporting anyone with end-of-life care. Whilst we were confident the provider would hold discussions with the individual where it was appropriate or relevant, we found a number of the care plans we reviewed had no evidence of end-of-life discussions made.