The Churchley Rest Home Limited

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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. Care plans we viewed needed updating to ensure they contained information that was relevant, and person centred. The management team told us, “The care plans are out of date, we are reviewing every one of them, they will all be completed within 16 weeks.” One relative told us, “The individualised care is lacking. It’s good that independence is encouraged but she gets less attention, and others need much more.” Staff told us that they knew the residents well and they all talk to each other and shared information. One person told us, “I think they [staff] know me, yes they are always asking me if I’m alright and how I am getting on.”

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 told us that the local church could be contacted if people requested. The local doctor’s surgery visited the home weekly to see people. One relative told us, “She hasn’t had any accidents here. There was an incident recently where she was unwell. The registered manager took her to AE and stayed with her for 5 hours.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Information was available in different formats if people needed.. We had mixed feedback from people about the communication relatives had with the staff and management team. Some people had told us that following an incident they had not been kept informed. However, one relative told us, “I can email them, and they also email me if necessary. I get a response the same day. They are good at communicating. They are on the phone straight away if there is a problem.”

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 home did not hold regular resident and relative meetings, however feedback from people and their relatives demonstrated that they regularly feedback information to the manager around their care. Complaints policies were in place and details of how to make a complaint were displayed around the service. On staff member told us, “We have now implemented daily handovers where important information was recorded and shared with staff.” One relative told us, “They are very forthcoming. They always give me a quick rundown on her condition.” Another relative told us, the registered manager contacts me if there are any changes to Mum’s care and we talk regularly. Yes, they would listen to me and respond to anything I raised.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People and relatives told us that staff supported people to appointments and stayed with them during their appointments. We saw sections in people’s care plans where people had access to things such as homely remedies. One relative told us, “She is happy. She hasn’t had any big accidents. She takes herself off on the bus.” Another relative told us, “They would get in health professionals if they were worried about [my relative]. I think they know when she’s not feeling well.”

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’s religious views and wishes were recorded in their care plans, and a church service was held monthly. There were tailored activities to suit everyone’s ability such as seated sports which we observed during our visit. People were in the garden room playing bowling and encouraging each other. The registered manager told us how they have an animal service that comes in and if someone is unwell the animals would visit their rooms if they wanted. One relative told us, "She is smiling every time we go to see her. I call it happy dementia. She came for respite and stayed.

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. We saw in people’s care plans end of life plans such as funeral arrangements. We saw some people had Do Not Attempt Resuscitation (DNAR) forms in place and Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment forms (ReSPECT) in their care plans. One staff member told us, “Caring for people at the end of their life was very important. Choices of music would be discussed and there would be involvement with community professionals and the family.”