Clarence 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 service met people’s needs.At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good.

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 provider ensured people were at the centre of all care and treatment decisions. Support was planned and delivered in partnership with people, and changes in their needs were responded to with flexibility and consideration. People were supported in ways that respected their unique preferences, routines, and life histories. Care plans provided clear and specific guidance for staff on how to meet each person’s individual needs and preferences. Staff told us they were committed to providing person centred care, and said they had enough information about people’s needs. During the inspection, we observed staff delivering care in a way that was personalised, respectful, and responsive, reinforcing the service’s person-first approach.

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 provider demonstrated a comprehensive understanding of the diverse health and care needs of people. This had resulted in care that was joined-up, flexible, and responsive to individual circumstances. Records showed people experienced a seamless approach to care that supported choice, continuity, and positive outcomes. The registered manager described well-established partnerships with a range of external health and social care professionals, which supported timely and coordinated care delivery. Staff confirmed they regularly worked in partnership with professionals such as district nurses, GPs, and dietitians to meet people's needs effectively. Feedback from external partners was positive. They told us the service maintained consistent communication and shared relevant information without delay. Records showed regular input from professionals including social workers, case managers, pharmacists, and tissue viability nurses, demonstrating an integrated approach to care.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The service ensured that people received accurate, relevant, and up-to-date information in ways that suited their individual communication needs. Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of how to share information in accessible formats, guided by personalised communication preferences recorded in care plans. The provider had systems in place to ensure information was consistently adapted to meet people’s diverse needs. This included using plain language, visual tools, and involving family members where appropriate. People and their relatives told us they felt informed and involved, and that the service communicated important updates clearly and promptly.

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. The provider made it straightforward for people to share feedback, offer suggestions, or raise concerns about their care, treatment, and support. Staff actively involved people in decisions about their care and clearly communicated any changes that resulted from their input. People and their relatives told us they felt included and listened to. The provider had effective systems to ensure individuals and their relatives, where appropriate were kept informed and involved in planning and reviewing care. Care records reflected people’s decisions, preferences, and the level of support they wished to receive from staff. Staff confirmed that involving people in day-to-day choices and longer-term planning was an essential part of the service’s approach. Relatives also felt reassured by regular updates and open lines of communication with the staff and management. The provider had a clear complaints policy in place. Where complaints had been raised, they were handled in line with the policy and outcomes were recorded. People and their families knew how to make a complaint and felt confident they would be listened to.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Adaptations and equipment were in place to meet a wide range of needs, helping to remove barriers and promote inclusion. We observed the environment had been adapted to support equitable access, including the availability of a lift for movement between floors and a choice of accessible bathing facilities to suit individual preferences and mobility needs. These adaptations enabled people to maintain dignity and independence in their daily routines. Staff told us they had access to equipment such as mobility aids and hoists which they used confidently and safely. Care plans clearly detailed any equipment needs and how staff should support people using them. Feedback from staff and partners confirmed the service took proactive steps to ensure equity in access, including timely referrals to external professionals and ongoing assessment of people’s changing needs.

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 received equitable care that was inclusive, fair, and underpinned by a strong respect for individual rights. During the inspection, we observed numerous kind and respectful interactions, demonstrating the service’s commitment to promoting equality and ensuring positive experiences for everyone.The staff team was diverse, and they told us the culture of the service embraced inclusivity, recognising and valuing different backgrounds, beliefs, and needs. Staff demonstrated an awareness of how to support people in ways that respected cultural identity, personal values, and protected characteristics. Staff training covered equality, diversity, and human rights, and this was reinforced through regular spot checks and supervision. Staff told us they felt confident in delivering care that was inclusive and person-centred. Policies and procedures aligned with current equality legislation, ensuring both people and staff were treated fairly and respectfully.

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. People were supported to plan for important life changes in ways that promoted dignity, informed decision-making, and personal choice. This included planning for end-of-life care and other significant transitions, ensuring people’s wishes were known, respected, and recorded in advance. The registered manager told us people had the opportunity to express their future care preferences, and care plans reflected this. Although no one was receiving end-of-life care at the time of the inspection, we reviewed detailed plans that set out individual preferences such as where they would like to receive care and who should be involved in decisions. Staff were familiar with these plans and described how they would use them to ensure people received sensitive and personalised support at the end of life. This proactive planning helped ensure that people’s needs, rights, and emotional well-being would be prioritised during times of change.