Fallowfield

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.

The last rating for this key question was Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good. This meant people received a service that met their care and support needs.

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.

The provider had robust and individualised care planning and risk assessment processes in place. People had a range of detailed care plans in place, tailored to their specific health needs, risks, and personal preferences. Risk assessments were regularly reviewed and updated, ensuring that emerging needs and potential hazards were identified and effectively managed. People told us they were involved in assessing and reviewing their care and were happy with the care and support they received. Comments included, “Staff communicate with us and are very caring”, “We had discussions with the manager and were provided with lots of information”, “We always felt that [loved one] was a person to them [staff]”, and “They [staff] always check before doing anything.”

The provider had a ‘resident of the day’ programme, where a person’s care was focused on for that day. This included ensuring the person’s care plans and risk assessments were up to date and reflective of their needs and wishes, their room was cleaned and checked for any maintenance issues, and the staff team including the activities coordinators and chef asked if there were any special requests they would like.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and risks and completed a range of training to ensure they had the knowledge and skills required to support people safely and appropriately. Staff worked effectively with health and social care professionals to ensure people received joined up care provision and continuity.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People told us staff communicated with them effectively. A person said, “I am a little hard of hearing but they [staff] remember that and speak more slowly.”

Staff knew people well and knew how best to communicate with them effectively. Care plans documented people’s communication needs, and these provided staff with detailed guidance. The registered manager showed us information that was readily available for people and their relatives. They told us information in accessible formats would be made available to people if required. This included large print, braille, audio, or in different languages.

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 encouraged and supported to contribute their views about the service. Meetings for people and their relatives were held on a regular basis. We looked at the minutes for the last residents meeting held in March 2026. Items discussed included call bells, menu suggestions and portion sizes, communication with health care professionals, and activities.

There was a complaints policy and procedure in place and people, and their relatives told us they knew how to raise a complaint if needed. A person commented, “I haven’t needed to make a complaint, but I know how if I need to.” Complaints records showed that when complaints were raised these were investigated and responded to in line with the providers policy.

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People had access to health and social care professionals, and staff held regular rounds with the visiting GP to discuss people's health needs. Staff contacted emergency services when required, and people had access to a range of professionals, such as speech and language therapists and dieticians.

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 diverse needs and wishes were assessed, documented and respected, and care plans documented any protected characteristics and reasonable adjustments required. The provider had an equality and diversity policy and procedure in place and staff had received appropriate training. This meant staff had information, knowledge and skills to understand and protect people from discrimination.

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 had care plans and records in place which documented their wishes and decisions at the end of their lives where they chose to discuss this.

The registered manager told us they used the ‘Steps Programme’ approach to support people at the end of their lives. The Six Steps to Success Programme is a structured framework designed to improve end-of-life care in care homes and domiciliary settings, focusing on staff education, organisational change, and patient dignity. A nurse told us, they worked with a local hospice who provided end of life care training and also visited the service to observe staff practice to ensure learning was embedded.