Stella Matutina Care 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.

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 and relatives confirmed they were consulted when people’s needs changed, or to make decisions about people’s care. One relative said, “[Staff] have called me twice, and were incredibly prompt so I could make a decision.” A person living at the home added, “I am always talking to them about things as they change.”

Staff could explain what person-centred care meant and were observed to give people different levels of support dependent upon their needs. Information in care plans was person centred, reflecting people’s individual needs and preferences.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of older people, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Staff received training in various topics to help them understand the needs of older people, and several staff had worked at the home for a number of years, which helped promote continuity of care. One person living at the home told us, “[Staff] know the residents well, there is a lot of care and understanding.”

The provider had systems in place to provide 1 to 1 support if people’s needs changed and this was required, if the appropriate funding agreements were in place.

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

Managers assessed people’s communication needs during the pre-admission assessment, and detailed information was included in people’s care plans.

Staff had introduced person-centred techniques to help people with communication difficulties. For example, 1 person was partially deaf, and staff used a whiteboard to help them communicate; and we observed staff patiently repeat themselves and talk loudly for people hard of hearing.

The provider had a robust General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) policy and staff had received training in data protection. The home was registered with the Information Commissioner’s Office.

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

The provider had included information about how to complain in the service user handbook and there was a robust complaints policy in place. People knew who to speak to about complaints and felt confident they would be listened to. A person living at the home said, “I haven’t complained, but if there was something I was unhappy about I would certainly talk to [senior staff] and they would explain everything to me.”

The provider sent out annual surveys, resident’s meetings were held bi-monthly and people were approached to give feedback about their care and experience during daily walkarounds. Information about actions taken in response to feedback was displayed on the communal noticeboard.

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

The provider had on-call arrangements in place, to ensure there was always managerial support available in an emergency.

The home was accessible to those with mobility needs, with ramps, handrails and lifts; and people had access to a range of mobility equipment. Adapted crockery and cutlery was available for those who needed it.

Dementia friendly signage was not available at the home, to help reorientate people with more advanced dementia. Following feedback, the registered manager assured us dementia friendly signage would be considered if people’s condition deteriorated further.

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 living at the home did not raise any concerns about discrimination or how they were treated, and confirmed staff at all levels listened to them. People were provided with culturally appropriate care, with reasonable adjustments being made so people could continue to practice their faith.

Staff received training in equality and diversity to help them understand discrimination and potential inequalities people may face. The staff handbook included detailed information about discrimination and referenced best practice guidance and legislation.

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.

Staff received training in advanced care planning and end of life care, and could tell us what good end of life care looked like. The home worked closely with the local hospice and district nurses when required.

The home facilitated religious services for people who had passed away. This allowed people to say goodbye to friends they had made whilst living at the home; the services were valued by those unable to attend funerals.

Staff had received several thankyou cards and compliments for the support given to people during the end of their lives.