Compton House Christian 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 Outstanding. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 from staff. People's care plans reflected their physical, emotional and mental health needs and these had been effectively assessed. They contained clear and descriptive guidance to staff about how to support people to meet their needs. This included how they wanted their personal care to be delivered and how to support them safely. Systems were in place for these needs to be regularly reviewed. One professional said, “Staff are friendly and appear to know the residents well.”

People and staff told us that there was a focus on person centred care. One person said of staff’s response to support, “They work terribly hard. Nothing is too much trouble. They help with anything you want.” One staff member said, “I would quite happily put my mother, my father, anybody and I would recommend because the care here is excellent.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. People’s care and treatment was delivered in a way that met their assessed needs.

Continuity of people’s care resulted from staff working consistently and meeting their assessed needs. Effective partnership working with external agencies meant that care was delivered effectively, and people’s health care needs were responded to. People were supported to access health care services as required.

Care was coordinated and delivered to those most at risk and considered the preferences and protected characteristics of people living at the home. Staff understood those people who were more at risk and monitoring tools and systems were in place to respond to any changes and seek further support if needed.

People’s communication needs were met to enable them to engage in their care, treatment, and support to maximise their experience and outcomes.

People’s individual needs to have information in an accessible way were identified, recorded, highlighted and shared. These were in line with Accessible Information Standards. This is a standard that ensures people with disabilities or sensory loss receive information and communication support that they can understand and use. For example, one person’s care plan detailed that they preferred information about their care to be given verbally, then followed up by large print emails to them.

People’s communication requirements were assessed in detail and included what support they might need to convey feelings and choices. Communication assessments and care plans captured sensory needs, and communication preferences.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support.

People understood how to give feedback about their care and how to raise concerns if they needed to. People told us that the service was responsive when any issues or requests were made. The provider had a complaints policy and people said the management was responsive in dealing with any issues raised. One person said, “They have listened to what I wanted done.” Another person told us, ““If you have any complaint, they want to know about it.” One person said, “They communicate with you and your relatives and keep them posted.”

The provider ensured that systems were in place to seek people’s views and involve them in their support. Regular and inclusive residents and relatives’ meetings were facilitated to discuss developments at the home and to seek people’s views and opinions. People were encouraged to attend. One person said, “Once a month we have an open meeting with residents to discuss anything. They tell you what they think and it's up to you to put your part on it.” Another person said, “I go to all of them. They give people the opportunity to talk about the things they are concerned about. I have very little to be concerned.” Another person commented, “These are opportunities for people to make comments.”

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

People received care that was timely and in line with best practice and quality standards. Consistent provision of staff training supported this. The provider sought, through the assessment process, to ensure that people received their care when they needed it and wanted it.

People accessed services, such as health appointments and treatments, when they needed to, without physical barriers, including out of normal hours and in an emergency. Physical premises and equipment were accessible. People’s communication needs were assessed, and discussion took place during the initial assessment phase which considered what adjustments or resources people might need to access information about their care and support.

People were supported in a person-centred way to ensure equitable experiences and outcomes.

Leaders and staff 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. For example, those with limited mobility were actively supported and encouraged by staff to engage in activities in communal areas.

People’s care planning was consistent, and the provider sought to provide a person-centred service that acknowledged people’s differences. The registered manager and provider were alert to potential inequality issues. Management recognised staff from different backgrounds and this approach applied to acknowledging people’s diversity and individuality.

Staff understood their role in ensuring people's equality and diversity needs were met. Training records showed that there was compliance in completing Equality and Diversity training. The services Equality and Diversity policy highlighted a commitment to equality and human rights legislation. People could access care and support when they need to and in a way that worked for them.

People were supported to plan for their future needs.

People’s end of life wishes were sought as part of the assessment process. Information regarding advanced planning, such as the decision to have a Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR), was obtained and included in care plan guidance for staff.

Staff supported people at the end of their lives with compassion and dignity. They had received end of life training to support their practices. The home forged links with local hospices to provide additional support and provide additional training to staff. The registered manager said, “The palliative care unit is very good. I am in a close relationship with them. They were invited to retrain staff for EOL care and didn’t want to rely on online training.”

People’s care plans captured people’s wishes and plans for the future that detailed people’s preferences for support. Records for people who received end-of-life care showed detailed monitoring of health input and what actions staff had taken. One person was receiving palliative care at the time of the inspection and the deputy manager was alert and responsive to any updates or needs that were needed.