Highfield House Nursing 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 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.

Although people and relatives confirmed staff knew them well, we received mixed views from people and their relatives about the level of formal involvement they had in relation to care reviews and discussions about their care. This meant we could not be assured care and treatment choices were made in partnership with people.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s support needs and preferences. They understood what person-centred care meant and we observed this in practice during the assessment.

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 told us they received care from staff who knew them and their needs well.

The management team considered staff skill mix and strengths when allocating staff to specific areas of the home. This helped to ensure people were provided with continuity of care from staff they knew well and who were best placed to support them with specific needs and health conditions. Staff understood people’s health and support needs and were trained to meet them.

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

People’s communication needs were assessed during the assessment process, with information recorded about how staff could communicate with them. This included information on any equipment used to improve communication, glasses and hearing aids for example. The management team told us people and relatives were provided with written information about the service and how to complain should the need arise, which would be provided in different formats and alternative languages if required.

We observed staff using a picture schedule to aid communication and getting close to people to communicate more effectively.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support.

People told us they were listened to and given the opportunity to share their views.

The provider had a complaints procedure in place which was displayed in the home and people and relatives were provided with information as to how to complain via the service user guide. The electronic visitor recording system provided the opportunity for visitors to comment or raise concerns as they were leaving the building. There was a process to record and investigate concerns and complaints. People and relatives all said they felt able to raise issues with staff or the management team.

The manager told us there has been relative and resident meetings in the past, however poor uptake of these opportunities had resulted in the service to reconsider the format of these to promote increased attendance.

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

Discussions with the management team showed they understood how to access specialist health or social care support should this be required and we saw referrals to specialist services such as speech and language therapy (SALT) and tissue viability nurses (TVN) were completed promptly where there was a change in people’s needs. This was confirmed by health and social care professionals.

Arrangements were in place to ensure staff had appropriate access to support for emergencies when a member of the leadership team was not on site. This included a clear on-call rota and emergency protocols.

Staff were very happy working for the service and told us they were valued, treated with respect, and they did not experience any discrimination or harassment. One staff member reflected on the multi-cultural team and said, “Staff always make sure all staff no matter where they are from are included and made to feel welcome.”Staff were well motivated and proud of their work and the team they worked with.

The manager was committed to promoting equality and inclusion across the workforce. They showed an empathy towards staff and their individual backgrounds and how these may impact on their working days.

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 supported to have equity in experiences and outcomes. People's care plans contained information in relation to people’s protected characteristics, beliefs and preferences. Staff had completed training in Equality and Diversity and demonstrated this was understood. Staff were responsive to people and ensured they received care and support in line with their preferences and needs.

The management team actively ensured the people they supported were treated fairly and not discriminated against. Where required reasonable adjustments to support equity in experience and outcomes had been made. For example, mobility aids and specialist cutlery were provided where required and people with religious and cultural needs were supported to follow their faith. The adjustments described helped to improve people’s experience.

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.

Highfield House Nursing Home could provide end of life care where this became appropriate and care plans included individual information about any specific wishes people may have. A relative told us, “When my [loved one] passed away [at the home] the staff were so kind and caring to us both, they [staff] were really lovely. They [person] was made comfortable and really well looked after.” Evidence provided demonstrated staff had received training in death, dying and bereavement.

Staff knew about people’s wishes in respect of the level of emergency care (resuscitation) or hospital admission. Documentation was in place via electronic care plans and original copies were maintained within an office which staff always had access to.

One person living at the home had expressed a wish to move back to their hometown, they told us, “They [manager] have been supportive about my decision.” A relative of this person described how the management team were working with other professionals and organisations to try to support a positive plan for this relocation to ensure the persons needs continued to be met safely.