Devon C Air Limited Homecare Agency

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

People received a personalised service that met their individual abilities and needs. Staff knew people well and were responsive to people’s needs and wishes. People told us they had access to health professionals. People felt they were listened to and felt comfortable to share feedback or raise concerns with the provider. The service had introduced an electronic care planning system and were in the process of adding more detailed information and guidance into care plans. They will be working with the local authority QAIT (Quality Assurance and Improvement Team) to complete this.

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.

People told us they were involved in their care planning and reviews. They said staff understood their medical conditions and preferences. Comments included, “I really do receive a personalised service that meets my needs” and “They have looked after me well, right since the first meeting before they started the service. They certainly asked a lot of questions. I felt reassured having just come out of hospital.”

Staff told us how they supported people as individuals and clearly understood their support needs. Staff gave us examples of how they involved people in their care. Comments included, “If it is a new client we will have a big conversation with the person and family and get a lot of information from them” and “I go in there first and ask if they need anything, I always listen and ask if they are happy or need me to do anything extra.” The service matched staff with people to achieve the best outcomes. Since the previous inspection, the service had moved to an electronic care planning system. The service was still in the process of adding detail and guidance to care plans. They will be working with the local authority QAIT (Quality Assurance and Improvement Team) to complete this. We will continue to monitor the service’s progress.

People told us staff worked with health professionals to ensure the best outcomes for them. Comments included, “The carers knew about the OT coming after my fall and they used to ask about the exercises I had been given and helped me to get them right” and “They (carers) have been very encouraging which has helped my recovery.”

Staff gave us examples of training they received from health professionals and worked alongside them at visits to ensure care was co-ordinated. Staff told us the office communicated with GPs so they had up-to-date information about the person.

We received positive feedback from professionals. A health professional said they enjoyed working alongside the staff and commented, “They were so gentle, respective and attentive with the patient and were open and interested.”

There were folders in people’s homes for staff to communicate with the district nurses. There was a barcode in the folders for the emergency service to access the notes on the system.

People and their relatives said they were supported with information in an accessible way that met their communication needs. One person told us staff read their care plan to them and got their agreement; they were happy with this. Most people told us they were able to access notes online. A relative commented, “I also have access to the online notes, which is so useful and I can see updates are done quickly after hospital visits, district nurse visits, new dressings, that kind of thing.” One relative said they were having difficulty accessing the app. We discussed this with the registered manager and they agreed to follow this up.

Staff described the different methods they used to communicate effectively with people and meet their individual needs and preferences. For example, explaining what they were going to do and seeking consent, writing things down, and ensuring they spoke clearly as some people lip read. The management team knew people’s individual communication needs and provided information in an accessible way.

The provider had policies to support the governance and protection of information.

People told us they found it easy to share feedback or raise concerns with the provider and they were listened to and involved in decisions about their care. Comments included, “It is a lovely little company and they do their best in the time they have got with me. I would certainly recommend them” and “It’s early in our experience, but so far so good and I can’t think of anything else they could do for [my relative] that would change things for [them]”. Where people had raised issues in the past, they told us these had been addressed to their satisfaction.

The registered manager shared the responses to their recent survey with us. These were rated good or very good. Where people had requested changes, the service had completed these to ensure the best outcomes.

The registered manager was in regular contact with people, often visited them, and listened to people’s views on the service. People were given a copy of the providers complaints policy and procedure.

People told us staff knew them well and quickly recognised when they were unwell. They were supported appropriately to access care and support relevant to them in a timely manner. One person said, “The (team of) carers know me well enough to spot if I am feeling low (in mood) and recently called the GP for me.”

Staff told us if they had concerns about people, they were confident that actions would be taken swiftly. Staff were able to call health professionals themselves and could escalate concerns to the office. The registered manager told us they worked well with other professionals. They had experienced some difficulties accessing GP surgeries and had supported some people to access the GP by filling in online forms.

We received positive feedback from professionals. A professional told us, “They are very approachable and communicate well.”

Staff were given information about the procedure for seeking medical attention during their induction, training and supervisions.

People and their relatives felt they were treated as individuals and their views sought and listened to. People told us they were treated fairly and without discrimination. People said, “The carers know I am still a bit slow, but they just let me go at my speed and chat away to me as we get stuff done. I never feel rushed” and “I was worried that they would ditch me when the calls went down, but [the registered manager’s name] said there would always be a space for me if I should need more help. I was so relieved. I realised it had been worrying me.”

Staff told us they enjoyed working for the service and felt valued and well supported. Comments included, “It is just all the little bits of reassurance and all the updates they send make me feel safe and supported” and “They have been very good to me.” Staff were clear about their role and responsibilities. They had a good understanding of the ethos of the service and the importance of treating people equally regardless of their background, their abilities, or their lifestyle.

The service had an equal opportunities and diversity policy.

At the time of our assessment, no one was receiving end of life care. Some people we spoke with said they had discussed their do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNAR) and end of life wishes.

Staff had completed online training and the registered manager was arranging for staff to work alongside and train with the local hospice nurses. The registered manager told us how they discussed DNAR with people. Where one person was unhappy with a DNAR decision made in hospital, the service had contacted the GP to ask for it to be reviewed.

Staff had access to individual DNAR documents on an electronic app.