King Charles Court

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.

We identified a strong emphasis on providing person-centred support. People’s individual needs and preferences were taken into account when planning care.
People’s care plans were detailed, informative and accurately reflected their needs. They contained sufficient information to enable staff, who did not know people well, to provide effective person-centred care. Information was provided about things likely to make the person happy and descriptions of how the person expressed anxiety or sadness.

Staff involved people in decision making and responded promptly to any requests for assistance.

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.

The service had built strong working partnerships with healthcare professionals such as GP’s, physiotherapists, the speech and language team, PEG services and tissue viability nurses.

Staff proactively escalated any concerns to the relevant agency to help ensure timely interventions. People were supported to arrange and attend regular appointments

Feedback from professionals confirmed the service worked collaboratively with other agencies. An external professional who visited the service regularly told us, “They know patients really well, we have ward rounds, issues are dealt with promptly, comms is very good, they suggest things that are appropriate."

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

Care plans included information about people’s communication needs, for example if they used hearing aids or needed glasses for reading.

Relatives told us the service communicated openly and effectively and shared information about any changes to people’s needs promptly.
 

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.

The service’s complaints policy was available in accessible formats and people were comfortable raising any concerns with the registered manager. People and relatives told us they had “no complaints” about the support the service provided.

Resident and relative meetings were organised to give people a platform to share their views on how the service was organised. In addition, people and their families were asked for their views annually via a survey. People and relatives commented “We attend the residents’ meetings, they are a good opportunity to talk about the home and if there are any issues and ask for our ideas.”

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

Staff treated people fairly and ensured they were able to access care and support services when required. People were confident and comfortable in their home and staff responded positively and promptly to people requests.

Healthcare professionals visited the service regularly. For example, a member of staff from the GP practice visited the service weekly and completed annual reviews.

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’s individual needs had been considered. People’s rooms had been arranged so that they could move around their rooms safely. One person told us, “My room is small especially when they need to use the hoist - staff have it off to a ‘T’ in how to manoeuvre my chair, commode and hoist to get me to bed. They are amazing and never moan as it is very cramped for them. I have asked for a larger room with a ceiling track and I'm waiting for another room to become available”. Another person told us they had recently been assessed by health care professionals and received a new chair so that they could move around the home safely.

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.

Care plans contained information about people’s wishes at the end of their lives. These were very person centred and informed staff of the individuals last wishes so that they could be provided i.e. what clothing they wished to wear and music they wanted played. When people were unable, or reluctant, to discuss this, records showed families had been asked to provide information. The service had contacts with local clergy so people’s spiritual preferences could be met.