Right Choice Home Care

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 required improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed 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.

The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

People, and their relatives where appropriate, were involved in assessing their own or their loved ones needs, and in developing and agreeing their care plans and risk assessments. People’s assessments included information about their personal histories, interests and hobbies, religion and culture, along with information about their health, wellbeing, care and communication needs. People were involved in regular reviews of their care and support. They knew they could request a change in their care plans should there be a change in needs or preferences.

The provider 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 plans were outcomes based and included information about maintaining people’s independence much as possible. They included guidance for staff on delivering the best care possible in relation to people’s individual needs and preferences. Staff were provided with opportunities to discuss current good practice and standards at regular team meetings.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

Information provided by other professionals was included in people’s care plans. At the time of our inspection, people who received support from the service had not moved to or from other services. However, the registered manager advised us they understood the importance of information sharing subject to people’s consent.

The provider 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.

People were encouraged and supported to mobilise as much as possible. People at risk of malnutrition or dehydration were prompted and encouraged to eat and drink. Staff supported people to access and attend health services where required. The service recognised the importance of person-centred care on people’s emotional wellbeing.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

People’s care plans focused on maintaining their independence as much as possible. Staff monitored people for any physical or behavioural changes which might indicate a concern and knew to report any such changes immediately. People’s told us the support they received from the service had improved their quality of life.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

People, and their relatives where appropriate, understood their rights around consent and had signed to confirm consent to their care plans. The service had carried out capacity assessments with people. These followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and associated guidance. The registered manager told us people’s capacity assessments were looked at each care review.