Infinity Care Limited

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has improved to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this. Improvements had been made and the service was no longer in breach of the Regulation relating to the need for consent.

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’s needs were assessed prior to them receiving a service to ensure their needs could be met. A relative said, “There was a good introduction, excellent information was given, staff listened, and appropriate care plan discussed and implemented offered flexible choices.” Overall care plans provided an adequate description of people’s current needs, including their healthcare and communication needs along with information about any cultural needs or protected characteristics. Whilst staff were positive about the usefulness of people’s care plans and risk assessments, we found some examples where these still needed to be more detailed or contained conflicting information. The provider was in the process of transferring people’s care plans to a new digital social care record. As part of this process, care plans were being reviewed to ensure they were accurate. We did not identify that anyone had experienced any harm or poor care because of shortfalls in the care plans viewed as the staff team knew people well. This was confirmed by people who all told us their needs were met effectively. Comments included, “The same group of 5 or 6 carers visit, they know everything about [Person] and his needs” and “Staff are very good at recognising any problems, they previously notified me to an injury they had noted, they informed me immediately.”

Overall, the service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. People’s care and support was planned in conjunction with health and social care professionals such as GP’s, occupational therapists, and community nurses. Evidence-based tools were embedded into people’s care plans, for example, tools which helped to assess people’s risk of developing a pressure injury. However, as discussed elsewhere catheter and diabetic care plans needed to be developed further to fully reflect best practice guidance. The registered manager was taking action to address this. The induction of new staff was detailed and included information about best practice in relation to medicines management, maintaining confidentiality and dealing with emergencies in line with local guidance. Staff had access to all policies via an App and each month staff were asked to read a ‘Policy of the month’ to ensure they understood these. Staff meetings and spot checks were also used to reinforce best practice. Staff completed post falls monitoring for 72 hours. This was to check for injuries or further deterioration. Staff spoke of the importance of encouraging people to eat and drink healthily and raising concerns if this was not the case.

The service worked well across teams and services to support people. Staff worked alongside occupational therapists, reablement professionals, GPs, and community nurses to ensure people’s needs were managed. One staff member described how they had recently worked with an occupational therapist to review one person’s moving and handling needs. They said, “It was handy for me to be involved so that we could explain the person’s routine. They are now putting other adaptations in place to suit his needs.” Whilst there was scope for these to be more detailed, staff had sought specialist advice when drafting epilepsy and catheter care plans. A registered manager told us their digital social care record would soon be integrated to GP Connect enabling authorised staff to access certain GP records such as health summaries and prescribed medicines in real time.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice, and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. Information about people's diagnosed health care needs were recorded in their care plans and included information about how this might impact on them. One relative told us, “We have confidence that the staff have a genuine interest in [Person’s] welfare as they want to remain in their own home” and another said, “Staff are good at noticing any changes, they are observant and if they notice any concerns with her skin, they administer creams and let me know”. This relative told us how staff had reacted very quickly when the person became acutely unwell explaining that staff had called an ambulance which was reassuring.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. The leadership team were committed to ensuring people received the best possible care. A registered manager told us, “We help our clients… we get prescriptions, go the extra mile, [Person] needs a new hearing test, we have arranged this for her. If someone is low on milk, we text the next carer, staff are always ready to help... we have delivered Christmas day lunches, we try to make a difference.” People and their relatives told us their care and support improved their quality of life. Comments included, “[Person’s] mobility changed in 2024, and staff adapted to their needs very well and encouraged their quality of life with suggestions and changes to their routine with better equipment centred around their needs, it was all very good, they were very proactive in their approach” and a relative told us how visits from the carers helped lift their family members mood on days when they were feeling a little low. Staff recorded details of the care and support provided during each care visit. Office staff monitored these to confirm people’s needs were being met. With relevant permissions, relatives and some professionals were able to access daily notes, allowing them to be assured about their family members wellbeing. One relative said, “We can see the staff reports which is fantastic and keeps us engaged in her care as a family.” The provider monitored outcomes for people through reviews, reassessments, spot checks and surveys.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Some improvements had been made since our last inspection and the service was no longer in breach of the Regulation regarding consent. Leaders had undertaken a higher level training course in the application of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. It was evident people’s views and wishes were considered when their care was planned, reviewed, and delivered. One person told us, “Staff ask my permission before any personal care is given.” People’s capacity to consent to aspects of their care had been assessed and a range of decision specific mental capacity assessments had been completed with regards to tasks such as medicines management. Consent forms were signed and copies of legal authorities to make decisions on behalf of others had been retained. Some staff continued to lack confidence in describing their role and responsibilities in relation to the MCA 2005. The registered managers told us staff meetings and supervisions would continue to be used to provide additional learning and reflection on this subject.