Home Instead Leigh

“The provider involved people in assessments, to ensure the service could meet their needs and wishes. Enough staff were deployed to carry out care visits timely and complete all required tasks. Staff were punctual and remained for the duration of each call. Staff received sufficient training, supervision and support to ensure they could carry out their roles safely and effectively.”

“Risk assessments of the environment and people’s specific needs were completed. Overall, these were of good quality, although one person’s risk assessment required more personalisation and control measures reviewing to ensure they were suitable. Medicines were managed safely, by trained staff who had their competency assessed.”

“Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. Where support was required with nutrition and hydration, people received enough to eat and drink to stay healthy. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care to ensure positive outcomes and a smooth transition when moving between services. Staff monitored people’s health and worked with other services, such as medical professions to support healthy living. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff made decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have mental capacity, ensuring others involved in people’s care were included in this decision making.”

“People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity and ensured people were central to their own care and treatment. People were offered choice and encouraged to maintain their independence.”

“People and their relatives were involved in decisions about the care. Staff provided information to people in ways they could understand. People knew how to give feedback or raise concerns and were confident the provider would listen and act on what they had been told. Care plans were detailed and provided clear guidance for staff to follow, to ensure care was provided how people wanted it.”

“Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, with people, relatives and staff speaking positively about the support provided and how well the service was run. Governance systems were in place, though we were not assured timeframes for completion had been adhered to. We also found action planning and the lessons learned process required some development. Managers worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and provide opportunities for people and the wider community to receive support and information through the pooling of resources across the health and social care landscape.”