Dent House Nursing Home

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 79 (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.

People were consistently empowered to take an active role in planning and making decisions about their care and treatment. Feedback demonstrated that staff placed people at the centre of decision making, ensuring their views, wishes and preferences were listened to, respected and acted upon. Families and those important to people were meaningfully involved, where appropriate, which helped to ensure care was tailored to individual circumstances and delivered in line with people’s wishes. This collaborative approach supported positive outcomes and promoted people’s independence, dignity and wellbeing.

Care plans were highly personalised, reflecting people’s preferences, strengths, aspirations and both current and anticipated needs. Staff supported people to understand available care and treatment options, enabling them to make informed choices about their care. Care planning demonstrated a holistic approach, considering people’s physical health, emotional wellbeing and social needs, including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. The provider consistently delivered person-centred care that reflected what mattered most to people and supported them to achieve outcomes that were important to them.
 

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.

People’s specific health and social care needs were assessed and recorded in their individual care plans. Staff supported people’s care to be well co-ordinated and were proactive in ensuring people were protected from discrimination. The provider understood the diverse health and social care needs of people residing at the service, including engaging with different agencies supporting those with protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.

The registered manager and staff worked well with other external health care agencies to make sure people’s needs were met. Feedback from professionals confirmed partnership working was successful, confirming communication was good and responses contained the information requested meaning they had all the relevant information to support with their required role.
 

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

People’s individual communication needs were assessed and recorded in their care plans as a guide for staff to refer to when needed. The provider was able to give people information in a range of different formats or languages if that was identified as a communication need for a person.

Relatives confirmed information was available and they were kept updated by staff in relation to their relative, “I know who is involved in their care and If there were any problems or concerns, I wouldn’t have a problem going to them or to the manager.”
 

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.

People told us they knew how to complain if they were unhappy with the care service they received. Feedback was sought on a regular basis and was inclusive of people, relatives and visitors to the service who could also contribute to the process. Where people had raised concerns, they confirmed that they received a response and staff acted quickly.

The provider had a complaints policy and procedure in place and people were given information about how to complain. The registered manager saw learning from complaints and concerns as an opportunity for improvement and regarded this as a positive process.
 

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

People had equal access to care, treatment and support because the provider complied with legal equality and human rights requirements, including avoiding discrimination, considering the needs of people with different protected characteristics and making reasonable adjustments.

The registered manager and their staff were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage different groups of people in accessing care, treatment, and support, whether this was from the wider society, within organisational processes and culture, or from individuals.
 

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.

The provider ensured their staff received training relevant to the care needs of the people they supported. This helped ensure people were supported by staff who were skilled and able to fully support them to achieve their required care outcomes. Staff also received training in equality and diversity awareness, the Equalities Act 2010 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005. This helped ensure staff understood how to support and enable equity in people’s experiences and outcomes.
 

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 make informed choices about their needs and plan their future care where this was relevant to them.

People’s decisions around healthcare interventions and whether they would like to be resuscitated if their heart stopped, along with information about how they like to be cared for, was contained in a hospital passport which could be handed over to emergency care or hospital staff in case of having to go into hospital. Staff recognised not everyone wanted to discuss these matters with them, and sometimes information was gathered through conversations with families or those important to the person, to ensure people’s wishes were captured.