Apple Tree

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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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 was exceptional at making 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 always at the centre of all the care they received. Care and the environment had been built around individual needs. People were encouraged to be in control of their lives and care was delivered around their needs, wishes and aspirations. One staff member told us, “We have person centred care training and it’s something we promote in our day-to-day work, the people living here are both so unique and different we have to understand that.”

Without exception, care plans and risk assessments were individualised and detailed. They were specific to the person’s individual needs, considered their histories, preferences, likes and dislikes and ensured all aspects of care and support were considered. Records also reflected people’s aspirations and goals for the future. Care planning involved people and those who were important to them and promoted the choices and levels of involvement people could engage. Staff worked with people and families in a person-centred way to ensure all aspects of their care and support was assessed, planned and individual. People accessed community activities based on their likes and dislikes and chose what they wanted to do.

The garden reflected people’s individual preferences, this included a large trampoline. One person had a specific love and interest of Go Karts. A full track had been fitted into the garden. This encouraged fun, exercise and positive engagement for both people living in the home. The change had been very well received and had become a meaningful part of their daily routine.

People’s individuality was reflected in the environments, by their routines and by the differing staff team that supported them. Staff acted as advocates for people and ensured they were involved with their care. They knew people exceptionally well and what was important to them, including things that may make people anxious or emotionally distressed.

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 received support from professionals who understood the diverse health and care needs of people. People had access to a whole range of professionals including, learning disability nurses, psychiatrists, speech and language therapists, nurse specialists and GP’s. Staff were able to give examples of how they worked with a variety of different professionals to develop individual plans of care for people. A staff member told us, “The professional input is key in getting things right for people. Sometimes it has to be changed a bit.”

The continuity the staff team provided had exceptional outcomes for people. The staff team were specifically recruited to work with individual people, which had enabled people to develop positive relationships with staff. Without exception each member of the management team and staff team knew people well.

The provider was good at developing appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Communication needs were assessed and plans individualised and adapted to ensure they were specific to the person. Care plans reflected people’s chosen methods of communication.

There was a range of accessible information available for people should they require it. This was in relation to their care and support, policies and procedures within the home and meetings they had participated in. All information was available in an easy read format for people and freely available.

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

Both people and those important to them were at the centre of the care. Relatives, staff and professionals were given the opportunity to complete regular surveys on the home, to ensure their views were captured. The leadership team was able to tell us how they could use this information to drive improvements throughout the home if needed.

Care plans in place that had been created with people, ensured staff had information available about how they supported people to make choices and remain independent. When people could not verbally communicate, these plans considered the action people took to express their needs. Staff we spoke with were aware of these plans and how they included people in their care.

The provider monitored compliments and complaints. There had been no recent complaints at the service. All policies had been adapted and presented in easy read formats so people could access and view these if they wished.

People had access to advocates if needed. The service promoted advocacy and had easy read information available for people.

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

There were processes in place that the manager could consider if concerns arose. They had links with external agencies that they could engage with to raise concerns if needed.

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 manager and staff were aware of inequalities people living in the home may face and were able to tell us the action they would take when facing these. There were systems in place to consider people’s experiences in care.

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.

The provider was not supporting anyone who was currently receiving end of life care; however, they were aware of action to take if needed. The provider was aware of the action to take during these times and would adopt a multi-disciplinary approach when developing and introducing these plans.