Albany House - Doncaster

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 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. Care and support was person-centred. People’s care plans were developed collaboratively with people and their families. People's rooms were personalised to their own tastes. A relative told us, “[Members of staff] know and understand [family member]. They just understand [family member] and have a good rapport with them.”

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. Members of staff shared information effectively during handovers and through care records, which ensured people received consistent support from familiar staff who understood their routines and preferences.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats tailored to individual needs. Information was displayed appropriately throughout the care environment. We saw information about members of staff who were champions for different elements of care and support, and there were posters about upcoming activities.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Members of staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. People had communication care plans in place which outlined their preferred methods of receiving information. Regular meetings for people who lived in the care home took place. This gave people a forum for discussions about meals, menus, activities and any issues they wanted to raise. Meetings for relatives and family members also too place separately. One person told us, “I haven’t had to raise anything. [The registered manager] is very approachable and I can talk to them.”

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. There were a range of different activities and opportunities available for people. A member of staff told us, “I know about the people who live here and what they like to do. I have a box of different jigsaws for people living with dementia. They are big pieces and they are colourful. People pick the ones they like. There is one with cats and [person] choses this one because they like cats.” The provider made reasonable adjustments to reduce barriers, for example, to support mobility and communication.

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 were treated fairly and equitably. There was no evidence of discriminatory practice and no concerns were raised about equality and diversity in the care home.

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. People had end of life care plans in place and ReSPECT (Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment) forms had been considered. A relative told us, “[Family member] has a ReSPECT form in place and staff know about it. There is a Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA) in place and the care home has a copy.”