Threen House Nursing Home

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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment, 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. People and their relatives told us their care needs were met. A relative explained, “[Registered manager] knows [person] so well and really looks after [them] in a personalised way.” They were able to make choices about their care. We observed staff being attentive, engaging with people and respecting their decisions. People were well groomed, dressed in appropriate clothing and took part in personalised activities. People and relatives told us the provider was responsive when people’s needs changed. A relative explained how the provider had trialled a new approach and personalised care for a person when they had expressed a specific need. The relative commented, “I know it cannot have been easy to make the changes to the rota and way staffing was organised. But this showed me how committed they were to giving [person] the right care.” People took part in a range of social and leisure activities. Comments from people and their relatives included, “Residents get on well with each other and staff” and “Staff take part in the activities with people, singing and dancing.”

People were supported by familiar staff who knew them well. Staff worked closely with other professionals to ensure people received continuity of care. Relatives told us they were able to visit when they wanted, and they felt involved in decisions about people’s care. Relatives told us they worked collaboratively with staff. People using the service were involved in decisions about their care. Comments from people using the service and relatives included, “Staff work collectively and keep me informed”, “They encourage me to understand the right way and guide me” and “I think care is very much tailored to the individual resident.”

People were provided with the information they needed about the service. There were notice boards and written information available for people. We heard staff talking to people about different choices, such as menus and what they wanted to do. Relatives told us they felt involved and had the information they needed. People and their relatives were involved in care planning and reviews. Comments from people and their relatives included, “I can ask questions and I can speak with [the management team]”, “[Registered manager] involves me and is good at communicating” and “There is a [messaging] group for relatives to keep us informed of what is going on.”

The provider listened to and involved people. The registered manager and owner worked at the service each day. We saw they spent time sitting with people and listening to what they wanted to talk about. Relatives and people using the service told us this always happened. Relatives explained they were well informed and able to contribute their ideas. There was a suitable complaints procedure. People knew who to speak with if they had concerns. Comments from people using the service and relatives included, “The staff are brilliant and if we have any issues, we can talk to them” and “We do not have any complaints. I would be happy speaking with [registered manager] if I did.”

People experienced equity in access. Staff supported people to access other services when they needed. For example, escorting them on appointments and organising transport when they needed this. Relatives confirmed this explaining how staff had supported them to take people to church, the local community and for walks in the local park.

People experienced equity in outcomes. Staff completed training about equality and diversity. There were appropriate procedures in place. People told us they did not experience discrimination at the service.

Staff supported people to remain at the service at the end of their lives if this was possible and their choice. They worked closely with healthcare professionals to make sure they planned for and met people’s needs. This included managing their pain and making sure their wishes were respected. The provider gave staff training and guidance to understand about good care for people who were dying and at the end of their lives. Relatives told us the registered manager had worked with other professionals to help ensure people could return home from hospital when this was appropriate and their choice. A relative told us how staff and the registered manager had shown respect and kindness to the family following the loss of a loved one who had lived at the home. They told us how staff had been sensitive towards the feelings of another loved one who continue to reside there, offering appropriate individual support.