Muzaana Care Services Ltd

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 service met people’s needs. At our last inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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 received person-centred care which met their needs and reflected their preferences. They explained about personal touches that had made them feel important. Their comments included, “The staff pay attention to detail’’, “They are like family members and nothing is too much trouble for them’’, “They bought me a Christmas present, that was a lovely surprise’’ and “When it was [a relative’s] birthday, the staff helped [person] get ready for the family event, looking lovely, smartly dressed, hair styled and looking perfect.’’ The registered manager told us they organised for people who wanted to have pet therapy, with visiting pets. The staff knew people they cared for very well, and this was confirmed by everyone who we spoke with.

People received continuity of care. The agency supported people to take part in special events which were meaningful for them. For example, they had facilitated travel to family reunions, holidays and attending special events. Staff worked with other professionals to help provide continuity of care. One relative explained, “[Person] had a fall and was admitted to hospital, this happened when the carers were not with [them], but the carers visited [person] in hospital to keep [them] company.’’ One professional explained, “Muzaana have good working relationships with people they support and other professionals. They are a team working together for the benefit of the person.’’

People were given a range of information about the agency and other services they could access if they wanted. They had access to care plans and knew who to speak with if they wanted more information. People were given photographs (with names) of staff who would be working with them. They could use these to help identify and remember the staff. Relatives explained that the agency contacted them to discuss people’s care when needed. One relative commented, “They are very good with their communication.’’

People’s views were represented in care plans. People and their relatives told us the staff offered choices and listened to people. Their comments included, “The carers have an excellent way they interact with [person]’’, “They always listen to us and are respectful of our wishes’’ and “The carers really encourage [person] to be involved in conversations.’’ People told us they knew how to make a complaint. We saw complaint were investigated and responded to appropriately.

People were supported to access this and other services. Staff worked with people to help overcome barriers. Some people had sensory impairments, some did not speak English and 1 person was deaf. The staff had learnt ways to communicate with people using different methods. Staff working with the deaf person had learnt sign language and developed visual aids to support communication. Those working with people who did not speak English as a first language used visual aids, had learnt some basic words and used mobile phone applications to help them translate. These methods worked well and allowed people to access services and feel heard. People were supported to access places of worship when they wanted this. Staff supported people to attend worship and to pray in their own homes when this was part of their care.

People’s human rights were respected. The provider had procedures about equality and diversity. Staff had training in these and demonstrated a good awareness of how to promote equity and ensure people had good outcomes. People using the service and their relatives confirmed this, telling us there was no discrimination.

People were supported with appropriate, sensitive and person-centred care at the end of their lives. The registered manager told us they worked with people’s relatives to help prepare them when a person was at the end of their lives. They told us family members had spoken about how important and useful this had been when their loved ones had died. The staff continued to engage with relatives after a person’s death to help make sure they felt supported and in acknowledgement that the loss of visiting carers would be an additional bereavement for them. One relative commented, “When I had a death in the family, they were so kind and caring, supporting me and giving me comfort.’’ The agency also provided bereavement support for staff who needed this, giving them time off work when needed and supporting them through informal meetings. The staff worked closely with palliative care teams. When 1 person was admitted to a hospice the staff continued to provide care and support in the hospice to give the person continuity and familiar carers.