Cherry Tree Manor

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 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 68 (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 received personalised care and support. Overwhelmingly, people and their relatives were happy with the care they received. One relative told us, "They are gentle and considerate; these words are so easy to use about the staff at this home." People were able to take baths and showers when they wanted. They were well presented and wore clean clothes.

The home had a dedicated activities manager who was very experienced and, over the years, had gotten to know people well. People were supported to participate in a variety of events, such as art and flower making. There were regular quizzes and impromptu activities carried out when people requested them.

Where people stayed in their rooms, they were encouraged to participate in activities. Music was important to many people, and there were regular music activities which people said they enjoyed.The home also had a therapy dog, which was a regular visitor and was enjoyed by many people.

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 registered manager understood the diverse health and care needs of people. They had developed strong links, so care was joined up, flexible, and supported choice and continuity. The GP visited each week and a range of other health care professionals visited to support people. One professional told us, “I have no concerns about this care home, people receive good care.”

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

Information was provided in formats appropriate to people’s needs. A newsletter was available every quarter for people and their families. People had access to mobile phones, which enabled them to remain in contact with family and friends. We observed staff supporting people to choose from the menu options. Menu plans with pictures were shown to help inform people about the food they were eating. Some people enjoyed listening to the talking newspaper and talking book and this was always encouraged.

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 of their feedback.

People were involved in decisions made about their care and support. People and relatives knew how to raise concerns, but there were very few complaints or concerns. We reviewed the complaints log and all complaints had been addressed in line with the provider’s policy.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support, and treatment they needed when they needed it. People were asked regularly how they wished to receive care and support. Care plans were not always updated to reflect this; however, when speaking with staff and the registered manager, they were able to tell us how people preferred to receive care and support. The registered manager was able to evidence that people had regular health reviews and support to attend specialist clinics.

Call bells were answered promptly, and this was confirmed by residents. One person acknowledged it could take slightly longer during busy periods, but they were happy to wait.

The provider had worked to ensure the premises were fully accessible to all. Ramps had been installed so people could enjoy the fishpond. Raised beds for planting had been installed so people could help with the garden, and there was a shaded area within the garden for those who liked to sit outside but didn’t enjoy direct sunlight.

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.

The registered manager actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support, and treatment in response to this. The registered manager recognised when people’s needs changed and worked with family to overcome barriers. For example, referring someone for talking therapies or working with a specific health professional to support a person.

Care records did not always reference equality and diversity, but staff and the registered manager were knowledgeable in this area and had completed this training.

The registered manager told us where people’s needs changed and a specialist piece of equipment needed to be purchased, they had the freedom to order this, which they said was invaluable. We identified some people were at high risk of falls. Whilst care plans were not always updated, the registered manager was able to show us what action they had taken to support people. For example, using pressure sensor mats and walking aids.

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.

Care plans had information on how to support people who were at the end of life. We saw advanced care plan information was clear and concise, detailing where people had a ‘do not attempt cardio-pulmonary resuscitation’ (DNACPR) in place. Their wishes were included in their end-of-life care plan.

The registered manager had developed strong links with local churches, and a local vicar visited each month or when requested. We saw an example where one person wished to have ‘The sacrament of the sick’ and this was accommodated.

When people died, staff attended the funerals, and we saw many cards and emails expressing gratitude about the care relatives found their loved one received.