Morton Cottage Residential 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

This key question was previously rated good. This key question remains good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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 environment needed to be more conducive to person-centred care, with ways for people to orientate themselves. The outdoor spaces needed review and improvement to help support people to feel calm and at home. Care planning needed review to ensure people’s individual needs and experiences were fully reflected. Improvements had been made recently with regard to activities, but much more needed to be done.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices. The provider decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in their needs.

People’s care plans reflected their physical, mental and social needs, including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. The provider needed to ensure people’s emotional needs were better reflected and planned for in records; they were responsive to this feedback.

People who used the service and those close to them (including carers and dependants) were regularly involved in planning care and treatment.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people. They worked hard to ensure care was joined-up and flexible.

Staff had built up good levels of trust and understanding with people. This meant people received a good continuity of care from the provider. Staff advocated well for people. People’s care and treatment consistently met their assessed needs.

One relative said, “When my parents initially went into care, staff looked and tried various options to help support my parents settling into the home, even offering a separate room for my dad. We all felt included and involved in decisions made to settle them.”

The provider did not always ensure people had appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats they could understand. For instance, there were no pictorial menus to support people’s meal choices. There were long corridors and some large internal spaces, where better use of signage and notices could be used.

People and families raised no concerns about having access to the information they needed, when they needed it. One person said, “They let me know what’s happening.” A relative said, “They always keep us updated over the phone.”

The registered manager had attempted resident and relative meetings but these had not always been well attended. They committed to reviewing this again and trying more innovative approaches to ensure people and their relatives had the best opportunity to access information.

The provider ensured people and their relatives could share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They did this by being approachable and always ensuring people and relatives knew they could raise issues with them. The provider involved people in decisions about their care and told them when changes were needed.

The registered manager was on site full time and approachable. One relative said, “I spoke to the manager when (relative) came in and she asked lots of questions before she came in, so it’s all been fine. They are always there when we need them.”

Formal approaches to listening to and involving people in planning how the service was run needed to improve, for instance surveys, questionnaires or meetings.

People and relatives felt confident they could complain if they had any concerns and had confidence these concerns would be dealt with.

People were supported by staff who understood their needs well. Staff escalated health and wellbeing matters and sought advice regularly. People received the additional health support they needed from a range of external clinicians, such as frailty specialists and podiatry.

People were able to easily engage with the registered manager, who welcomed their ideas and responded to any concerns. There was further scope to ensure people remained at the heart of future changes, and their experience of care was consistent.

The provider supported people 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. One relative said, “I spoke to the manager when (relative) came in and she asked lots of questions before she came in, so it’s all been fine.”

People’s care plans included some information about what kind of care and support they wanted for when they neared the end of their lives. Some of these records needed review and improvement to ensure they contain a level of detail regarding emotional and spiritual support. The provider committed to reviewing and improving the relevant records. Most records we looked at contained up to date and person-centred information.