The Elms

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 service 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 service 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 service delivered care that was tailored to each person’s needs and preferences. Care plans and risk assessments were detailed and person-centred, clearly reflecting people’s specific needs and requirements. The registered manager and staff demonstrated a strong understanding of the people they supported and used this knowledge to ensure care was always provided in people’s best interest. People’s bedrooms were personalised to reflect their interests, and the environment was adapted to meet their needs. Observations and care plans showed staff consistently respected and responded to people’s wishes, ensuring truly person-centred care. The service recognised that delivering high quality care relied on knowing each person well and providing genuinely personalised support.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. The service showed a strong awareness of people’s different health and care needs. Care records showed care was delivered consistently, promoted choice, and resulted in positive outcomes for people. The registered manager maintained effective partnerships with health and social care professionals, helping to ensure continuity of care. Staff told us they communicated regularly with nurses, GPs, occupational therapists and psychologists to ensure people’s needs were met. Feedback from professionals was positive and highlighted the service’s clear and timely communication.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Clear communication plans supported staff to understand how best to engage with each person. We were assured this service met the requirements of the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The AIS isa law to make sure that people who have a disability, impairment or sensory loss receive information they can easily read or understand. Information was made available in formats that met people’s needs, such as pictures for choices or easy-to-read guides for complaints and feedback. People and their relatives told us they were well informed and involved, with updates shared clearly and without delay.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. People and their relatives were given regular opportunities to share feedback through meetings and surveys. Relatives were actively involved in care planning, helping to ensure care remained person-centred. A complaints policy was in place, and any concerns raised were responded to promptly, with people and families confident they would be listened to and taken seriously.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People received care that was inclusive and tailored to their individual needs. Staff received equality and diversity training, which was supported by relevant policies and ongoing monitoring. Referrals to external professionals were made in a timely manner, and feedback confirmed the service promoted fair and equitable access for all.

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 engage in meaningful activities, including community outings and holidays. They enjoyed developing new skills, such as cooking and had access to local day centres where they could learn, socialise, and build relationships with others. These opportunities had a positive impact on people’s wellbeing, and relatives valued the experiences and outcomes achieved.

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 were aware of who to contact for additional support with end-of-life care. The service sought to be a ‘home for life’ promoting comfort, continuity and a sense of belonging. The registered manager and staff worked closely with people and their families to plan care in a sensitive and supportive way, ensuring changing wishes and needs were respected.