Summercourt

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 79 (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.

People and their relatives were positive about how staff treated them as individuals and knew them well. A relative said, “I’m impressed with the home as the staff bring out the best in their individual residents.”

Care plans were clearly written and provided guidance to care staff to help them support people in a person-centred way. They contained person centred information, such as “I like things done in order and to be neat and tidy.” This related to a person’s preferences regarding personal care, including the use of a shower cap and the colour of flannels. It was acknowledged in their care plans the person had “high expectations” which we saw staff meeting patiently and respectfully. Their relative said, “They treat her as an individual and they try to acquiesce to her requests (even when) she demands a long shower.”

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.

People benefited from a regular, stable staff team who knew them well. This help ensured people received continuity in their care. Relatives told us staff made referrals to health and social care professionals when required.

People could access health care as the registered manager, deputy manager and the staff team worked well with external health and social care colleagues. This was demonstrated by the feedback they shared with us, our observations and care notes. A staff member said, “I think we have a really good relationship with our community nurses, GP surgeries and dieticians and they carry out regular reviews here.”

Feedback from health professionals confirmed this view. One said, “The information given by the staff at Summercourt is always precise and accurate” and “They are really up to date and well-trained in matters related to the wellbeing of the residents.” While a social care professional said, “(The registered manager) recognises when she needs to contact us regarding any mental health deterioration or any potential adverse effects to medication we have prescribed. She keeps in good contact via telephone or email.”

A visiting dentist said, “I can see from the clinician notes for a particular patient, oral hygiene was classed as requiring improvement, instructions given to care team as the patient required assistance with brushing. The patient’s next appointment, 6 months later, oral hygiene has been classed as good - with little plaque and tartar build up. This will have been the result of the care team taking on our advice and in result, the patient’s oral health has improved.” They also confirmed care staff were present when they assessed people’s oral hygiene, providing comfort and helping to interpret their wishes if their diagnosis of dementia hindered their communication.

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

The new nominated individual was in the process of reviewing the information available to people and their families when they moved to the home to be in line with the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). Their previous experience made them confident in introducing alternative communication formats to Summercourt. We reviewed the updated Welcome Pack they sent us which was clear and informative. The presentation, language style and use of pictures helped make it an accessible document.

Relatives found the monthly newsletter and photos of events and activities reassuring and informative. Staff recognised families needed support and reassurance, including help with understanding the emotional impact of dementia on relatives.

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.

There was a clear complaints process which had been adapted by the new director of operations to make it more accessible to people and their families. The ethos of the staff group was to value the feedback of people and their families to enhance their commitment to a person centred approach. Relatives said, “Yes, the manager always takes time to speak to me. I can raise issues and we can have a good chat”, “Yes, we have an open dialogue, and I can definitely raise anything I want to” and “Yes, I have a good relationship with (the registered manager) and she answers my queries straightaway.”

The registered manager discussed previous complaints with us, and we looked at the relevant records. One relative had regularly raised concerns, but this had stopped as their confidence in the staff group grew based on their good care and the leadership of the registered manager. The leadership team discussed with us how they could log ‘concerns’ as well as complaints to provide a clearer audit trail of how they had responded and to demonstrate their good practice.

There were informal systems to monitor people’s feedback through their actions. Kitchen staff and care staff worked together to note when meals were not eatenwhich was discussed in staff handovers. A feedback book was kept by staff based on people’s comments during and after meals. These comments were then reviewed by the external food provider and staff when the next menu was being planned to ensure the choices reflected people’s preferences. Several visitors said their relative had put on weight since moving to the home which they saw as a positive outcome.

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

There was a strong focus on ensuring everybody had access to interests or social events that benefited their well-being. This started when people first moved to the home when a document called ‘This is Me’ was completed to capture their interests and life experiences. Staff used this information to get to know people and build a bond with them.

People benefited from a range of social events and activities.For example, the home’s location so close to the beach meant this was easily accessible for trips. Staff were careful to ensure activities were overseen to help everyone be a part if they chose to. Staff recognised some people’s attention span was short so mixed and matched different games and quizzes. External entertainment was popular, while one family said they enjoyed the religious services held at the home.

When people’s care needs changed, the service responded appropriately. One person’s mobility had declined, and they had become reliant on the assistance of staff and equipment to move. The registered manager and the staff team liaised with the person and their family to move to a more accessible room. A visitor described the person as now happy and settled in their new surroundings.

Staff and leaders always 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.

Staff understood how people who used few words, or expressed themselves through actions, showed whether they were, for example, content, upset or in pain. This meant everyone’s needs were treated equally. One visitor said the staff recognised their relative was unable to read or write. Their relative enjoyed 1-1 time with staff participating in activities that suited their individual needs and receiving discreet support where literacy might be involved. This meant they could access and enjoy the opportunities that might not have been available to them if staff had not been so thoughtful and this made a positive difference to their wellbeing.

Staff interpreted people’s moods and changed their approach to suit the expectations of individual people. For example, some people showed through their reactions how much they appreciated being hugged and comforted by staff. While others preferred a more formal approach, including in the way they were addressed. This enabled people express themselves and be supported in the manner they were comfortable with and made them feel happy and validated.

Experienced staff supported newer staff to care for particular people so they could learn their idiosyncrasies and provide support to meet their expectations. For example, one said, “If I see a new member of staff struggling, I help them to understand that is how she is…and I would show them what she likes, as she is very particular…I go through things with them.”

One person could sometimes misinterpret the role of staff and cross boundaries. Their care plan was sensitively worded and staff, when asked about the person, were non-judgemental and understood how best to work with them to reduce the risk of incidents and maintain the person’s dignity and sense of well-being.

People’s communication needs and preferences were assessed and clearly recorded. Staff showed great awareness of people’s individual circumstances. For example, describing how they were monitoring the well-being of a person who was recently bereaved. We spoke with the person concerned who described how difficult it was to process the event, but they also told us about the kindness of staff. Their relative told us staff encouraged the person to participate in communal events and spend time in the garden, so they did not become socially isolated and lower in mood.

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.

Dignity was a key part of end of life care. Conversations with staff showed their compassion and commitment to making people’s end of life as comfortable and dignified as possible. They recognised the responsibility of preparing people for this final part of their life journey by making them as comfortable and keeping them as calm as possible. For example, ensuring they worked closely with health professionals so appropriate pain relief was available and the correct equipment in place, such as a pressure relieving mattress.

Care plans showed how people were involved in recording their views, including for end of life care and future wishes. These were individualisedand reflected the character of the person. For example, one person had been very clear about the outfit they wished to wear after their death. This reflected their attention to detail about their appearance in life. Another person just wanted to ensure they were surrounded by the photos of the people they loved. Records were in place to document what type of medical intervention people wanted at the end of their life.