Dynasty Brighton Branch (Domiciliary 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. This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.

This service scored 57 (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 care was not always delivered in a person-centred way. Whilst care plans were detailed with people’s needs, wished and preferences, these were not always robustly followed by care staff. People and relatives told us that the care call times were sporadic and often not in line with the care plan, they also were unaware who would be attending when. People were given the opportunity to provide feedback, however, due to staffing issues their preferences were not always met. For example, staff did not always have the availability to spend quality time engaging with individual people. When staff were supporting people, they did follow the information in the care plans to ensure these were in line with people’s wishes.

There were some shortfalls in how the provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was not always joined-up, flexible or supportive of choice and continuity. People and their relatives told us that care was not consistent or always delivered in a way which was important to them. Some care calls had been late or missed, and care staff did not always stay for the duration that they should. The provider was receptive to this feedback and was considering providing a rota to people, so they knew who to expect when.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. While people’s communication needs were detailed in their care plans, some people told us that they did not have ready access to this and found it difficult to request this from care staff and management. People and their relatives also described there being a language barrier between themselves and some staff at times.

The provider did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. People told us it was difficult to get hold of staff in the office in order to raise any concerns. Staff did involve people in decisions about their care but reported that matters were not always followed up as rapidly as they wished. The provider was receptive to this feedback and put in place a system for calls to the office to be diverted to mobile telephones instead when office staff were out supporting their care colleagues. There was also an on-call rota in place.

The provider did not always make sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Whilst appropriate referrals had been made to external professionals on behalf of people, for example the GP, we received mixed feedback from people and professionals regarding this. Some professionals told us that it was often difficult to get back in touch with the office to discuss matters. People told us that care was not always delivered in line with their wishes.

The provider had 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. Care plans detailed any specific needs that people had, for example, one person only ate halal meat. This was highlighted in their care plan for staff to follow if meals needed to be provided. Staff had completed equality and diversity training and showed good knowledge of this .

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. At the time of the assessment, there were no people receiving end of life care however, any decisions they had expressed were detailed in their care plan.