Moor Park 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 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 75 (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.

The provider had an in-depth person-centred care policy which included guidelines for staff. Staff recorded daily notes about people in a respectful and person-centred way. Bedrooms were decorated to a high standard and had a comfortable and homely atmosphere; people could personalise their rooms in any way they wished with items that reflected their hobbies and interests. People were aware of their care plans, but some people said they were not always involved in the reviews.

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.

Everyone including relatives thought the care was a high standard and that staff understood the needs of people very well. Care was joined up with other agencies such as those which support people to transfer from children to adult’s services, and local authority teams. The provider organised regular specialist ward rounds with external health agencies, for example tracheostomy ward rounds. A tracheostomy is a method to support people to breathe using a special tube and artificial airway. Several people in the home had these. Additionally in house services were provided regularly such as physiotherapy.

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

There was an access to information policy, and the provider had different ways to adapt information to meet people’s communication needs. People and relatives could use QI codes which were visible on posters around the home, to access information about the service and different health needs. The home used technology such as iPads to support people. Staff could access training for British Sign Language and Makaton to support people in the home to communicate.

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 robust complaints process and procedure, however people we spoke with had not made any formal complaints. People knew how to raise concerns and said they would be dealt with in a timely manner. A relative said, “They email me once a month telling me everything that is going on. I have seen a lot of changes over the years, and they are all for the better.” Another relative said, “I know who to report to and it gets done quick.”

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

The building was accessible, and people had the right aids and equipment to support them with their physical needs and mobility.

A person said, “I have a standing aid and quad stick, and all staff are well trained on what to do. They encourage me to use the equipment because they know I want to return home quickly.” Relatives could easily access the building at any time of the day.

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.

There were appropriate policies and training in place; the provider and staff were aware of any discrimination people may face. The provider recently became a member of a national charity that supports people with a learning disability. Membership gave staff the opportunity to develop their skills to champion human rights and improve the quality of life for people with learning disabilities, autistic people, and people with mental health conditions.

Care plans considered people’s requirements around mobility aids and adaptations.

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.

Staff completed end of life training and there were good links with the local hospice. People’s ends of life wishes and needs were considered respectfully in care plans.

Do not resuscitate in the event of cardiac arrest forms were completed where appropriate and reviewed. They were accessible to relevant staff and emergency services.