Elmcroft Care 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 inspection we rated this key question inadequate. At this inspection the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

At our last inspection the provider was in breach of the of legal regulations in relation to person-centred care. Improvements were found at this inspection, and the provider was no longer in breach of this regulation.

This service scored 68 (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 support choices and they decided, in partnership with people and those important to them, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People’s care plans were person-centred and reflected people’s individual preferences for support. However, we found some information relating to people’s emotional support needs and health conditions required more detail. For example, it was not always clear what practical support and de-escalation techniques staff should use to support people during incidents of emotional distress. We also found some people’s dementia and mental health care plans contained generic information and were lacking detail. Despite these concerns, people and relatives told us staff knew them well and their care was personalised. Following our feedback, the provider responded immediately to review and update the relevant care plans.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and responded flexibly to meet these needs, including adapting staffing levels to meet people’s changing needs. We received positive feedback from people and relatives about the continuity in people’s care. At the time of the inspection, the provider was in the process of embedding a keyworker system to ensure each person’s care was monitored and reviewed regularly to promote continuity and good outcomes. The provider worked in partnership with other health professionals to provide joined-up care which met people’s needs and preferences.

The provider supplied information in formats tailored to people’s individual needs. People’s communication needs were assessed and people had communication care plans in place. However, we found staff were not always providing information or supporting people’s communication in line with their communication care plans. For example, where a person did not always communicate using English, staff were recording they did not understand and did not know what the person was trying to communicate. This was despite clear guidance in the person’s communication care plan about how to use pictorial boards to support them. This was also identified as a concern at the last inspection. The management team told us they were continuously reviewing people’s care records to address issues with staff communication promptly. However, at the time of the inspection, improvements in this area were not yet embedded.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback or raise complaints about their care and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The management team had developed robust processes for listening to and involving people since the last inspection. People, relatives and staff had been involved in coproducing the new values for the service and there was clear evidence of the provider seeking people’s input to make improvements. People and relatives attended regular resident and relatives’ meetings and the provider frequently asked people for their feedback via surveys and care reviews. The management team displayed a ‘You Said and We Did’ board in the service to demonstrate action taken in response to feedback.

The provider had a clear complaints process in place and concerns were documented and addressed. People and their relatives told us they felt able to raise concerns and spoke positively about the approachability and responsiveness of the registered manager. One relative told us, “If I email then I get a response almost immediately, things get sorted out. Very open to suggestions/concerns and I feel very supported, office door is open, manager is very on it. I know that things are going to get done.” Another relative said, “They are responsive to anything I say and I can go to them with confidence.”

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People were supported to attend their health appointments or receive health professionals into the service as and when needed. Where people may require some additional support to access services, the management team had ensured staff had appropriate guidance. For example, we saw 1 person had information about how to minimise their distress when supporting them to access health appointments.

The provider listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care and support in response to this. Organisational strategies and training were in place to promote equity in experience including specialised dementia training. The management team had developed a greater range of activities to meet people’s individual needs and improved partnership working with other community and health services. During the inspection, we found staff were not always able to demonstrate a good understanding of people’s specific mental health needs. However, following our feedback, the provider responded promptly to arrange additional training for all staff to promote better understanding and outcomes for people.

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’s end of life care and future wishes were recorded within their care plans. The management team monitored and reviewed people’s end of life care experience to reflect and identify learning to promote dignified and person-centred end of life care.