Watery Lane Cottage

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 71 (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 were at the centre of their care and treatment choices, and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People’s care plans were person-centred and included information about what was important to them. We found care was adapted to meet people’s specific health and mobility needs. For example, a detailed epilepsy plan was in place for one person. One person told us they liked living in the home and enjoyed taking part in woodwork or visiting the coffee shop.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. The provider made referrals to health and social care professionals where needed. For example, we saw a referral to an occupational therapist to review a person’s mobility.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People had communication passports and personalised information in their care records which described their preferred methods of communication and any support they required to understand information. Staff knew people well and understood how to communicate effectively with them. During our assessment, we observed staff sharing information and explaining things to people in ways they could understand, helping them to make informed choices about their care and support.

The provider has an Accessible Information Standard (AIS) policy in place to ensure all people supported, families and carers receive communication in formats they can fully access and understand.

The provider did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support.

The provider had systems in place to gather feedback from people, relatives and staff.

However, during the period when there was no registered manager in post, these systems were not used effectively, and some feedback had not been reviewed or responded to for several months.

The provider recognised this issue and acknowledged the system had not been used consistently. They told us they planned to relaunch the feedback process with people, relatives and staff to help ensure feedback was actively encouraged, reviewed, and responded to in a timely way.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Staff told us reasonable adjustments were made for people, for example British Sign Language interpreters were organised for medical appointments.

Staff and leaders actively 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.

People and their relatives told us staff supported them to take part in activities they enjoyed, and which were meaningful to them. A relative said, “They are a set of dedicated staff. They always ensure [ Person] gets the things that make them happy.” They gave examples of staff supporting their family member to enjoy trips to London, including travelling on double-decker buses and trains, which reflected their interests and preferences.

However, some people had not been supported to attend church recently, despite this being an activity they had previously enjoyed. This meant people were not always supported to maintain aspects of their cultural or spiritual lives that were important to them. The registered manager told us they were reviewing how this could be supported in the future, including ensuring people had the appropriate communication support to access and understand services and activities.

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.

The provider shared an end-of-life plan that had been completed with one person. They told us they were also working with other people’s relatives to gather important information and support future decision-making. The plan included details about how the person wished to be cared for at the end of their life, as well as their preferences for funeral arrangements.