Elstow 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 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 showed that they and their relatives were actively involved in the planning process. For instance, one care plan guided staff in conjunction with their relative's views on how to assist a person experiencing disorientation regarding time and place, particularly when they were searching for their spouse who had passed away. There was evidence that people and their relatives participated in reviewing care arrangements on a monthly basis through the service's ‘Resident of the Day’ system, as well as more formally every 6 months.

The service worked closely with individuals and their families. For example, recently, they supported a person and their relatives in planning a holiday by preparing their prescribed medicines and updating health records. The person had such a positive experience that they are now being assisted in planning another holiday later this year.

The registered manager told us, “We need to be the eyes, ears and advocate of the residents, we need to make sure they receive person-centred care.” A relative said, “They seem to know [Relative] better and have time to encourage [Relative] more.”
 

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.

People received support from a consistent staff team. The registered manager told us they had stabilised staffing within the service and had not used agency staff since November 2024. This promoted continuity of care.

There were regular opportunities for people living with dementia and their relatives to be supported on their journeys. There were regular talks from the provider’s dementia specialist, as well as regular newsletters focused on dementia.

Recognising people were at a greater risk of falls, the service supported people to attend a fall prevention seminar chaired by a physiotherapist.
 

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. A staff member said, “We understand the need to adjust our communication style depending on which part of the service we are in. For example, on the second floor, we simplify our communication and ensure we speak clearly so that individuals can understand us. On the first floor, we can engage in more detailed conversations. It’s all about knowing the person.”

People's communication needs had been assessed and documented in their care plans. We observed that people were supported in using communication aids such as glasses and hearing aids. Staff gave us examples of how they would utilise communication aids, like cue cards, to assist people in communicating and to confirm their consent before delivering care. Larger print resources were accessible to individuals, including news articles available in large print. The service had accessible signage. A person told us, “I also use an iPad, one of the carers helped me with the set up and I use it to keep in touch with friends. I keep telling everybody how lucky I am to be here.”
 

The provider enabled 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 service held regular meetings with people and their relatives. Feedback from people or their families led to clear actions taken by the provider to improve services. A relative told us, “We also have relatives’ meetings where we can raise anything we want to discuss, and they will take it up for us.”

People actively contributed to the running of Elstow Manor, for example, by meal planning and organising celebrations like VE Day. A person told us, “I feel open to speak to any of the carers. I tell them what I need, and they get stuff for me or help me, it’s as simple as that. I don’t think they can do much more for me then what they are already doing.”
People and their families were contacted monthly to assess their satisfaction with care and support arrangements and to gather additional feedback. Furthermore, the provider reached out every six months to invite individuals to review their care in greater detail. A relative said, “I have had the opportunity to give feedback when I visit, if there are emergences they will call. I was frustrated at the start, but now we have regular reviews, and I am able to have my say about what [Relative’s] needs are, and they take into consideration my views and I find that very helpful.”
Both people and their relatives expressed confidence in raising complaints. There were systems in place for individuals to submit suggestions, including a suggestion box located in the reception area and the opportunity to share thoughts after visits. The service had received numerous compliments regarding the quality of care provided by people, their families, and external professionals.
 

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People were supported to access external health professionals wherever there was an identified need or request. A relative told us, “[Relative] goes to hospital appointments, and they will arrange transport and escort which we pay for, and it works our very well.”

The provider had invested in improving the environment for people living with dementia. This included identifying a floor within the service that had less bedrooms for therapeutic benefit, redecoration with garden and seaside settings to promote orientation and familiarity. Staff had received specialised dementia training. People living in this area of the service had regular structured activities that promoted social engagement and wellbeing. Exercise based activities were physiotherapist led.

Staff and leaders were innovative in how they listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. Staff and leaders actively used this information to provide exceptionally tailored care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff received training in equality and diversity. Care plans included details about people’s religion, culture, sexual identity, and preferences. Both people receiving care and their relatives expressed no concerns regarding discrimination within the service.

People's end-of-life care plans were not always fully completed. For example, in some care plans, it was indicated that people's end-of-life wishes had not yet been discussed or that these conversations would take place when the time arose. This meant there was a risk that people's end-of-life preferences may not be known. However, the provider had already recognised improvements where needed in care plans, and improvement actions were underway. However, there was evidence that people, their relatives, and relevant professionals have been involved in discussions regarding preferences for resuscitation and avoiding hospital admissions. When people had passed away, the service had received compliments and expressions of gratitude from relatives. We found the words "kindness" and "care" featured in these communications.