Queen Elizabeth House

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 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 treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. However, not all care plans were person centred, documented and reflective of individual’s preferences, life histories and wishes and this required some improvement.

People and their relatives told us they were not always involved in planning and reviewing their care and this required some improvement. However, people and their relatives told us communication with staff was good. They told us they were happy with the care and support they received, and staff knew them well. Comments included, “They [staff] listen to what I say and respond or sort it out”, and “They [staff] speak quietly and are mindful of privacy.”

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. Staff worked effectively with health and social care professionals to ensure people received joined up care provision and continuity. An array of health and social care professionals communicated with staff and visited the service on a regular basis to respond to people’s care and support needs.

Record showed staff referred people to external professionals in a timely manner when required. These included GPs, palliative care teams, dietitians and community mental health teams amongst others.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People and their relatives were provided with information about the service and other services they could access in formats that met their needs. The registered manager told us information could be provided to people in large print, an audio format and in different languages if requested. Some staff spoke languages other than English so they could in some cases communicate information to people whose first language was not English.

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 told us they attended residents’ meetings. One person said, “There are meetings, and I go sometimes.” Another person said, “I go to the meetings because it is after lunch, we are a captive audience.” We saw the minutes from the last 2 residents’ meetings. Issues discussed at these included activities, where most people said they were happy with the activities, they also discussed protected mealtimes, the gardening club and the resident of the day programme. The minutes from a recent relative meeting included discussions on activities, end of life care, food, GP visits and an update on the providers new care planning system.

There was a complaints policy and procure in place and people and their relatives told us they were aware of this. Complaints records showed that when complaints were raised these were investigated and responded to in line with the providers policy, and people were informed of the outcome.

People were supported to access the care, support and treatment they need when they needed it. The provider made reasonable adjustments for people with sensory impairments including poor vision and hearing and for people with mobility issues.

Staff and managers expressed a commitment to ensuring people did not face discrimination and had equal opportunities within and outside of the service. Throughout our assessment we observed people received the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff supported people to access healthcare appointments and helped to advocate on people’s behalf when needed. Activity sessions also supported people’s mental and emotional well-being by engaging them to interact with others, for example, playing games and listening to music.

Staff and leaders 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 not always assessed and documented within their plans of care and this required some improvement. The provider had an equality and diversity policy and procedure in place and staff had received training to understand this.

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 were cared for and supported at the end of their lives. Staff worked effectively with health care professionals and palliative care teams to assess and plan ensuring people’s needs and wishes were respected. Staff received relevant training to ensure they knew how to provide dignified, comfortable and pain free care whenever possible.