Seven Hills 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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 82 (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 ensuring people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices. They worked in partnership with people to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in their needs.

People were supported to live meaningful lives based on what mattered to them

Staff worked with people, their families and relevant health and social care professionals when making decisions about people’s care. Managers and staff ensured people’s views were sought, recorded, respected and acted on. Care plans and risk assessments were reviewed regularly to ensure people’s needs continued to be met, while maintaining maximum choice and control over their support. Relatives told us they were kept informed about changes in people’s needs.

Health care professionals told us staff were exceptional at providing person centred care. One said, “The individual presented with highly complex and challenging needs, and we needed to identify a provider capable of meeting those needs safely. When I carried out the client's three-month review, I was genuinely impressed by the progress that had been made. Through consistent, skilled and person-centred care, the nursing team had significantly reduced many of the behaviours and challenges that had previously been evident. In my professional opinion, this reflects the commitment, competence and consistency of the nursing and care staff, who not only accepted a very challenging placement but transformed it through high-quality care.”

The care home continued to experience good staff retention which meant many of the managers and staff had worked there for a long time and were familiar with people’s needs, preferences and daily routines. Our observations supported this, and we saw staff using people’s preferred names, engaging them in conversation about topics they enjoyed and adapting support in response to individual cues.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

The provider was exceptional at enabling people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff always involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The home promoted a positive working culture. One staff member said, “We have a team that collaborate effectively, and we make an effort to help one another through difficult shifts. The management is also very approachable.”

Shared learning was embedded and underpinned by the organisation's key values and ethos. People and their relatives told us they felt comfortable raising any concerns they might have with the managers and staff and were confident their views would be taken seriously. The management team explained they addressed any concerns raised promptly. Records confirmed previous safeguarding concerns had been managed openly with those involved and resolved.

Staff and health care professional feedback reinforced that information was shared in ways that built confidence and trust across all groups. Staff received effective training to ensure they had up to date knowledge about what steps they need to take to prevent or safely manage identified risks people might face including, risks associated with skin integrity, falls, and behavioural incidents that required positive support from staff. Relatives we spoke with confirmed this., One said, “The staff are amazing. They appear to be very well trained and know how to keep people calm and settled.”

People and families participated in wider decisions about the care home. The provider used a range of methods to encourage people to have their say and state their views about the standard of care provided there. This included regular one-to-one sessions with the registered manager, care plan reviews and satisfaction surveys. Relatives had the opportunity to attend regular meetings and felt listened to by the management team. The providers were also involved and were regularly in attendance at the service. We observed people, relatives and staff knew the provider and actively engaged with them.

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.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.