Dimensions Oxfordshire & Warwickshire Domiciliary Care Office

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

We reviewed 2 quality statements for this key question. The provider had developed an action plan to implement and monitor the required improvements for 2 houses over a period of 12 -18 months from the date of the assessment. A group of senior leaders met regularly to discuss and review progress and make any necessary changes to the timescales for completion. Other homes were being managed effectively.

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.

Relatives told us they were not always involved in the assessing, planning and reviewing of people’s care and support plans.

Care plans had been reviewed and were more detailed and current. These will be uploaded to a new digital system which will increase efficiency for staff and ensure the plans are contemporaneous. Staff told us they were involved in the development of people’s care plans and advocates and family members are asked to contribute. One staff member told us the managers write the care plans, with input from the staff group, but do not spend enough time in the service to know the person well.

Stakeholders had shared their concerns regarding safeguarding, staffing levels and person-centred care.

We reviewed care plans which demonstrated people’s needs were identified and recorded appropriately.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

Some relatives felt they should be involved more and listened to more often by staff. However, other relatives told us they were involved in decision making for people where they lacked capacity.

The provider told us staff were fully aware of the need to gain consent before supporting people. Staff told us they used different methods to gain consent from a person prior to assisting them. Staff told us they were aware of the different communication needs of people they supported. For people who were unable to communicate staff told us decisions were made in their best interests, following the process. Details were recorded in people’s care plans. One staff member told us, “We have people who cannot communicate in any way. In these situations, we always have family involvement, social workers, medical professionals etc to ensure we are acting in their best interests. These meetings are always recorded to look back on to help us in the future.”

Mental Capacity Assessments had been reviewed and updated. The provider had appropriately applied for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards for people being supported. Staff received mandatory training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Best Interest Decision making.