Jaden House

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 64 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Systems were not in place to ensure care plans were always detailed and person-centred. Though people’s interests were outlined, there was limited information about goals, aspirations, how people could be individually supported. Care plans were largely task-focussed. Information was included about any spiritual needs and how staff should support these to be met.

The registered manager understood the health and care needs of people and how to access external health and social professionals if required. The consistent staff team helped ensure people received continuity of care.

The management team understood people’s communication needs and provided appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. A person’s care plan included guidance for staff as to how best to communicate and provide information for them. A welcome pack was available in a written and pictorial format, which helped them to understand what they could expect from their care.

The provider did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. The provider did not always handle complaints in line with their own policy. There was not always clear records kept of complaints received and their outcomes. This meant it was not always clear how people’s feedback and concerns were addressed. There were no systems for anyone to raise a concern anonymously. Families, most people and staff told us they could raise concerns and would be listened to most of the time. Staff said they would direct family members to the registered manager if they raised concern.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Suitable staffing levels to meet the needs of people at the service were available at all times with an on-call manager. The registered manager and staff understood how they could help people to access health or social care support, and overcome potential barriers to access, should this be required.

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 and family members were generally positive about the care and support they received and told us they had not experienced discrimination in relation to experience or outcomes.

The provider did not always have a proactive and positive culture of safety based on openness and honesty. Lessons were not always learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. The providers procedures had ensured that incidents had been recorded. One incident report did not contain sufficient information to identify the events that occurred. This was highlighted to the manager who was responsive to the feedback.

There had been few accidents, action had been taken where these had occurred. Families said they could raise concerns, and that they will be listened to. People could raise concerns including externally. Staff felt they could raise concerns, and they would be listened to.