Jasmine Court Independent Hospital

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

This means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question as 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.

The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and decided, in partnership with them, how to respond to any relevant changes in their needs.

Staff regularly met with patients to understand their views on care and treatment. These discussions took place in one-to-one meetings with nurses and in ward rounds. Staff monitored patients’ conditions and discussed any changes at daily handover meetings.

This service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and our local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

This service did not have any out of area patients at the time of inspection and the average length of stay was 2.5 years.

Staff supported patients to maintain contact with their families and friends.

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

Staff made notifications to external bodies as needed. The service submitted notifications to the Care Quality Commission in accordance with the requirements of their registration. The service submitted safeguarding referrals to the local authority.

Staff ensured carers, families and commissioners were regularly updated about the patient’s progress.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. The service involved them in decisions about their care and told them what’s changed as a result.

Patients, relatives and carers knew how to complain or raise concerns. Patients said if they had any complaints, they would speak to the ward manager in the first instance. We saw that information about how to make a complaint and how to raise concerns with the Care Quality Commission was available on noticeboards throughout the ward.

Staff and patients discussed complaints and concerns in the community meetings and staff fed back at the beginning of these meetings any updates and what had changed since the previous meeting. We saw ‘you said, we did’ recorded in the community meeting minutes.

Staff knew how to acknowledge complaints and tried to swiftly resolve complaints with patients. In the last 12 months, managers received 2 complaints and 5 patient concerns. All were clearly listened to, and where possible addressed but when this was not achievable, a full explanation was provided to the patient who was satisfied with this.

In the past 12 months staff received 3 documented compliments. These included compliments about the environment being tidy, clean and fresh and how staff and patients all had smiles on their faces. Another compliment was from a family member who fed back that the service was the best he had ever seen.

The service made sure that everyone could access the care, support and treatment they need when they need it.

There was adequate medical cover day and night. There were doctors who stayed on site and could attend the ward quickly in an emergency and the hospital was within a reasonable travelling distance to the local acute hospital.

Staff planned for patients’ discharge, including good liaison with care managers/co-ordinators. Care plans identified discharge planning was in place from admission and regularly updated.

There were no delayed discharges at this service in the last 12 months with the service working closely with partners to ensure a suitable placement was found.

The service admitted patients from diverse religious and cultural backgrounds. Staff asked patients about their religious and cultural needs when they were admitted to the ward.

Staff shared that adjustments were made to accommodate patients with diverse needs. Information was also made available in various formats to ensure accessibility. For instance, patients with dementia benefitted from accessible information appropriate to support them such as easy read booklets, communication cards and pictorial cards.

Staff were supporting a patient to take part in Christian celebrations in the community. Staff supported patients to use a faith trolley which worked well to unite different religious beliefs and support individual patients.

Staff made sure patients could access information on treatment, local service, their rights and how to complain.

At the time of inspection, 100% of staff had completed training in Equality and Diversity.

The service supported people 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.

Staff created personalised care plans to account for the patient’s needs, wishes and feelings. We saw that patients and carers were included in the MDT meetings and when capacity was not present in a patient, they took the time to explain their care plan to them.

Staff ensured all relevant healthcare professionals and other relevant bodies were involved in planning the care and treatment of people with complex needs.