Eccleston Court 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 the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 50 (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 as people’s contribution, views or family views were not recorded or reflected in care plans. We observed care records reflected poor personal care for people, gaps in records where people had not received frequent showers. Medication care plans were not always person centred. There was no entertainment for people on the three days we were at the service, no presence of staff in the lounge area on Eccleston Court, people were sitting with no engagement. Redeployment of staff was not considered in the absence of an activity staff member. People who were in receipt of one-to-one care were not receiving this at times observed. We observed a person receiving a pureed diet, this was not in line with their diet and nutrition plan. Park Suite did not have enough dining chairs and tables to support people with their dining experience; people were sat in armchairs with lap tables eating meals.

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. We observed the provider liaising with external health professionals and visits to the service from external health professionals.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats tailored to individual needs. A member of the leadership team stated, “We ask people if they have any information or communication needs and if they do, we find out the best way of how to meet their needs. We record and document needs clearly and provide appropriate, accurate and up to date information in the formats we tailor to individual needs.” We observed language translation for a person on a sheet in their bedroom to support staff to communicate the use of key words.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. People we spoke with including family members, spoke positively about being able to talk to staff and management and their views and comments were listened to. One family member told us when they had made complaints to the manager they had been listened to, and matters had been acted upon. The manager shared there were regular residents’ meetings for people and formal and informal feedback was listened to, acted upon and they informed relatives and people of actions taken in response to what had been said.

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The physical premises and equipment were accessible at Eccleston Court and Park Suite.

Staff and leaders 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. Family members told us when they had spoken with staff and the management team they had always listened and taken on board feedback. One staff member gave an example of how they had promoted equality, when a person moved into the service, the staff used google translate to understand their wishes and the support strategies the hospital handed over were not implemented in the service after understanding the person’s needs.

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. The provider had close links with the community palliative care team and their local hospice. A family member shared their loved one was being cared for with end-of-life care and were complimentary about the level of care and support their loved on was receiving. Another family member shared they had been involved with creating end of life plans with their loved one but had not seen the care plan.