Meadow View

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 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.

Care plans were written in first person with detailed information about each person’s wishes and preferences. Relatives were consulted where appropriate, which helped to give an overview of people’s lives before they came to live at the provider.

Care and support was tailored to meet the needs of each individual. For example, we asked a member of staff why one person’s care plan did not contain any record of them being regularly weighed when others did. The staff member replied “[Person] hates being weighed so we don’t do it to them unless we absolutely have to. If we have to, we will explain to them why there is a need.”

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.

The provider understood the needs of the people they were supporting and ensured that the needs of each individual were met. One relative said: “My relative needs lots of support and prefers carers of a particular gender. The staff have been great at accommodating these needs. They have a hospital bed with a special mattress which they sourced for them.”

The provider had an autonomy and independence policy in place, the purpose of which was to “ensure all individuals who received services had freedom of choice in their lives as much as possible and lead a fulfilling life within society.”

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

Staff were observed adapting their communication techniques to inform people of the support they intended to provide for people. A noticeboard on the wall gave information about the date, the staff on duty during the shift and activities planned for the day. There were photographs of the activities so people who had difficulty reading could understand the information.

Relatives told us they were informed and involved in their family member’s care. One relative told us: “Their key worker is nice and called to introduce themselves to me when they started in the role.”

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.

The provider had policies and processes in place which placed emphasis on the importance of listening to and involving people in their care in order to enhance their wellbeing and prevent them becoming distressed. For example, in their positive behavioural support policy, the provider stated, “Colleagues should develop the understanding that through bettering a person’s quality of life, behaviours of concern are less likely to be presented.”

Relatives told us, “I can talk to the manager about any issues.” Another relative said, “The manager is a nice person and concerned about [person]’s wellbeing. I would give them 9/10 for their care.”

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

The entire building was wheelchair accessible, with tracking hoists fitted in bedrooms and bathrooms. The communal areas were spacious and comfortable, with outdoor areas also designed to accommodate all people’s needs.

Staff supported people to access the community, adapting activities to meet the needs of the individual. One relative told us: “We bought [person] their own wheelchair and staff will take them shopping in it. They will go on the bus and the hospital is only down the road so they will push her there to appointments. I do not have to worry about anything.”

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 thought of creative ways to provide people with experiences. For example, we observed people enjoying an interactive sensory projector in the living room.In the sensory room, a large TV screen could be set to different programs which simulated different experiences – for example, one program created the effect of a train carriage and window, so that people could feel like they were travelling on a train but still be in an environment that they were comfortable with.

Bedrooms were decorated and furnished in a homely way, with people’s hobbies and interests reflected in the theme of the room. This helped people to feel at home. Equipment such as hoists were fitted as ceiling tracking hoists, and any equipment was kept out of bedrooms where possible and brought in by staff only when needed. This meant that the rooms were not cluttered with equipment and felt like welcoming spaces.

Some people who were anxious about using public transport needed to be transported by taxi, which came out of their personal funds. Some people had their own mobility cars which staff could drive, allowing them to access the community. Others were able to use public transport such as the local bus route. This meant that some people were able to access the community with more ease than others.

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.

A Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) form had been completed for each person, in consultation with medical professionals and people’s relatives. These forms went into detail about what people wanted to happen in case of medical emergency, including whether or not they may wish to be resuscitated if they stopped breathing.