Tipton 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 service met people’s needs.

At our last inspection we rated this key question requires improvement. At this inspection the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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.

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. People consistently told us their care and support plans reflected what they expected from Tipton Home Care Limited. These plans were personal to them and contained information for staff on how people wished to be supported. One person said, “They ask us our likes and dislikes. I would not make any changes to the service. They never rush our care”. People’s care and support plans reflected their needs and wishes and were personal to them and their particular circumstances.

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. People were encouraged to take responsibility for their own care needs in their own homes. This included arranging their own healthcare appointments. However, when this was required, and they did not have anyone to help them, staff members supported them in a way which empowered them to maintain their own wellbeing. One person said, “Staff have contacted the GP when I needed it. Also, they once called an ambulance and paramedics for me and stayed until they arrived and took over the health care. They never rush my care.”

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People had individual assessments which accounted for their specific communication requirements. For example, 1 person expressed they had difficulties with their hearing. This was assessed and they expressed they wanted staff to support them with hearing aids, talk slowly and loud and to repeat themselves if necessary. They went on to say staff always acted on their requests. People received information in a way which was personal to them.

People were able to feedback to the service any ideas, compliments or complaints regarding the care they received. They were confident they would be listened to, and any comments were taken seriously and acted on where necessary. The service had a system in place to respond to any concerns raised including meeting with the person, investigating and feeding back within a reasonable timescale. Everyone we spoke with told us they knew how to raise a concern or to make a compliment.

The service made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People were supported by staff who were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage different groups of people in accessing care, treatment and support. We saw one person was at risk of exploitation. The provider recognised this, and risk assessed to ensure staff were aware of any potential targeting or discrimination and knew what to do if they believed something was wrong. People had access to out of hours telephone support and were able to contact the office when they needed.

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. Everyone we spoke with felt they were treated fairly and equally by the provider and the staff supporting them. The service complied with legal equality and human rights requirements, including avoiding discrimination, having regard to the needs of people with different protected characteristics and making reasonable adjustments to support equity in experience and outcomes. Everyone had their specific protected characteristics recorded and these were known and respected by the staff supporting them.

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, and when needed those close to them, were supported to identify their wishes for future care. However, this information was limited and focused on practical issues such as remaining in their own home. The providers documentation asked specifically what people’s “wishes, beliefs and life goals” were but this wasn’t recorded in all instances. People may still have aspirations and if these are not recognised or recorded there is the risk they become forgotten. We raised this with the provider who committed to review this with people as part of their care plan reviews.