Prinsted 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 64 (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 did not always ensure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices.

People were not always receiving a personalised service. We observed some people, who needed support with food and drink, were not receiving support in line with their care plans. Some care plans contained contradictory information and did not provide clear guidance for staff. We asked staff about the individual needs of people they were supporting; not all staff were clear about people’s needs or the support they required. For example, a care plan indicated a person’s ability to manage food and fluids varied, and they needed to be assessed by the nurse on duty to determine if they required fluids to be thickened. There was no guidance for staff to know when to check with the nurse. Our observations were that the person did not receive their meal in line with their care plan. A staff member we spoke with was not clear about whether the person was at risk of choking or when to check with the nurse. This did not support a person-centred approach to care for this person.

Other aspects of people’s care were well personalised. People told us they were well cared for and spoke highly of the staff. One person said, “I absolutely adore it here. It’s the best place I have been.” Another person told us, “I’m as happy as I can be.” Relatives described being kept informed about changes and involved in plans for people’s care. One relative said, “Communication is really good; I’m always informed if there is anything I need to know.” Another relative told us, “When you walk in, you’re a person, and they (staff) always have a smile on their face. There is time for you as a relative, as well as for the resident.” Care plans were holistic and included people’s emotional needs. This provided guidance for staff in what to do if a person became upset or distressed due to their dementia. Care records were detailed and included people’s personal preferences. For example, the bedtime routine for one person included their preferred time to go to bed, how they liked to be positioned in the bed and their preference for a night light to be on with the door open. Staff said this level of detail supported them to provide person-centred care.

The provider did not always understand the diverse health and care needs of people and did not always support choice and integration in the local community.

Some people had been assessed as being at risk of social isolation. People told us their social needs were not always supported and there were limited opportunities to access the local community. One person said, “I’d love to get out, but there is no one to take me, and I’d never ask, they are far too busy.” Another person with limited mobility spoke of missing their independence and wishing for more opportunities to get out and about. They told us, “I’d love to just go out for a walk.” A relative told us staff supported their family member to go into the garden when the weather was good, but this was their only opportunity for fresh air. Staff told us they had supported people to go out during the summer months and said, “Everyone gets the opportunity if they want to go.” However, people we spoke with described these outings as rare. One person told us, “I think in all the time I’ve been here I’ve only been to the shore once, either the weather isn’t right or there aren’t enough staff to help.”

People and their relatives told us there were activities arranged to support people’s social needs. One person said, “There are activities, and I can choose.” A relative described seeing photographs of their family member enjoying musical activities and said, “I know the staff always include them.” We noted some people were supported to join in with balloon tennis, but we observed some people were not supported with meaningful activities on the day of our visit.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

A notice board in the lounge area identified activities that were taking place; however the date related to the previous month. There was no dementia friendly information available to inform people of the planned activities. For example, there were no pictorial references or prompts to support people’s understanding. A staff member told us the activities planner had recently been changed and acknowledged it was, “Not very dementia friendly.” There was a lack of dementia friendly signposting around the service, and this did not support people to be as independent as possible. A staff member said, “We need to have more activities specifically for people with dementia, it’s something that we are looking at.”

Relatives spoke highly of the provider’s electronic system for communication. One relative said, “We have something called ‘relatives gateway’ which is electronic, all information is recorded and it’s always up to date, it gives me huge peace of mind.” However, they told us this system was being discontinued, and they had not yet been informed of what would replace it. Another relative spoke positively about the use of social media, they said, “There are regular updates, which is wonderful for families.”

People and their relatives said they received the information they needed regarding their care, one person said, “They always let me know what’s going on, I’m never left in the dark.” A relative told us, “The staff are very good when it comes to letting us know what is happening.”

People’s communication needs were assessed and care plans included details of the support they needed. For example, some people needed to use hearing aids as they were hard of hearing. Some people had advanced dementia or other health conditions which created barriers to communication. Their care plans included use of a tool to identify signs of pain where the person was not able to tell staff if they were in pain.

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.

People and their relatives said they knew how to raise any issues or complaints and felt their views would be listened to. One relative said, “I know who to address if there is a problem; and I know it will always be acted upon.” Another relative told us, “If there was any kind of problem, I’d talk to the manager, or senior nurse, they are both very good indeed.” Staff told us most issues people had raised were dealt with quickly. Records showed a complaint had been received and was dealt with swiftly, through the provider’s complaints process. The registered manager had completed a thorough investigation into the concerns and had met with the complainants to feedback about the actions that were taken and to ensure they were satisfied with how the matter was resolved.

People and relatives confirmed that the provider also held meetings and used questionnaires to gather feedback. When people’s needs changed, review meetings were held, and where appropriate relatives were involved. One relative told us their views were “always taken seriously and respected.”

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

People and their relatives told us staff were proactive in supporting them to access the health and care services they needed. One person said, “The staff are all there to help us, they organise everything.” Records showed staff had regular contact with health and care professionals. For example, a dietician visited regularly to support staff with managing a PEG feed. A visiting health care professional described having regular contact from staff to support them in monitoring the health needs of one person. They said, “Communication is good, we are able to direct care with the nurses and monitor progress.” They explained how staff had sent them information that indicated a change in the person’s condition, this had prompted them to visit to assess the situation.

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.

Some people were living with dementia and sometimes needed support with expressing emotions or feelings of distress. Staff knew people well and demonstrated a good understanding of their needs and how to support them. Records included guidance for staff in strategies to use when supporting people who were expressing their emotions. One staff member told us, “We spend time with people and try and make them smile, take their mind off things, offer them choices of activities or drinks to calm them.” A relative told us how staff supported their family member who had dementia, they told us, “There are certain carers here who are brilliant with her.”

We observed there was a calm atmosphere and people appeared to be comfortable with staff who were familiar with their needs and preferences. One person told us, “All the staff are lovely.”

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 were supported to plan for their care at end of life and relatives were involved where appropriate. Records included cultural or religious considerations and specific details that were important to people, including who they might want staff to contact on their behalf. Staff had received training in end-of-life care. One staff member described the positive impact of this training, saying, “It did give me confidence, and the nurses are very good, they support the health care workers and make sure the medicines are available.”