St Gregory's House 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 of this key question, we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant the service planned and delivered care and treatment in way that met people’s needs.

This service scored 68 (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 could not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices because some records were not always current or reflective of their needs. The staff decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care plans and records were not always reflective of the person-centred care that we observed. People and relevant others were involved in the planning and the reviewing of their care and support. People where appropriate, were consulted with about changes to their needs or decisions about them.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and staff demonstrated they knew how to manage people’s specific needs, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People and relative’s, we spoke with were very satisfied with the care and treatment they were receiving. However, improvements in the environment could be made to ensure people with dementia experienced a more developed service in line with current best practice. The service worked flexibly and in a joined-up way with relatives to ensure peoples’ preferences and needs were noted and catered for.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People’s communication needs were recorded and reviewed, and considerate of the Accessible Information Standards. Staff understood people’s communication methods and styles and provided information in a way which met people’s differing communication needs. Where people were nonverbal, staff had devised and used appropriate cues to establish effective communication.

Information about people in the home was kept securely via electronic records which staff could access readily. Relatives told us they were kept informed about people’s appointments and what was going on in the home.

The provider had systems in for people to share feedback and give ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support.

Where people and their relatives were provided with opportunities to give feedback we did not see how or where the feedback obtained had informed / improved the service delivery. People’s concerns and complaints were recorded and responded to.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People’s needs and what reasonable adjustments they needed had been implemented to ensure people had equal access to services.

People’s needs and what reasonable adjustments they needed had been implemented to ensure people had equal access to services. The building had been adapted to ensure it was accessible to people, appropriate aid and adaptions were in place. There was an on-call system covered by the management team to ensure out of hours support was available. This helped to ensure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The reliability of the lift was inconsistent, and the provider had taken action by fitting a stair lift and was reviewing the feasibility of a second lift in the building.

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 equally and their care and treatment was adapted to meet their individual needs. Staff had received relevant training and had a good understanding of people’s rights, discrimination and inequalities and what to do to protect people’s rights.

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’s wishes for their end of life care had been discussed where relevant and recorded. Staff had received training to support people with their end of life care. Where relevant staff worked jointly with the community nurses to support with end of life care.