Camellia 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 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.

Staff knew people and their preferences well. There was positive staff interaction with people which was encouraging and respectful.

Care plans were person centred, with each having a life history story. This included information such as schooling, family history, employments, previous hobbies and meaningful places to them. This meant that staff had a good understanding of people in the present time, as well as their history.

During the assessment, we observed discussions of meal choices. There was a mention of a childhood meal a person had not had for a number of years. After discussion with people who live at Camellia House, staff went on to make this dish for all to enjoy.

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 were supported by a dedicated, consistent, core team of staff who knew them well, which provided a continuity of care for them. There were regular visiting professionals, including a ‘ward round’ where people had health care reviews where needed. There was a communication log for information when professionals had visited.

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

Information was also presented in accessible formats in line with the Accessible Information Standard, helping to support people’s understanding and engagement. People had social stories which included important information to them. These also included pictures which made them more engaging. People had their preferred routine on the inside of their bedroom doors so that staff supporting them knew how best to support 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.

People's relatives told us they felt able to approach staff and managers at any time and were made to feel welcome when they visited. People using the service told us they felt comfortable raising any issues or concerns with the staff and knew the process to follow however, they had never had to do so. When talking about the registered manager with one person, they told is, “I feel I would go to her if there was anything. She is a kind lady.”

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

Communication logs were used to make health professionals aware of people’s personalities and individual needs to reduce the impact of barriers to their care.

We saw evidence people were referred to appropriate professionals when required. Staff worked closely with the GP and frailty team to support people with their health and social care needs.

People’s faiths were respected, with holy communion taking place. The time of this changed and we heard staff informing people of the change in time so they were fully informed.

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.

People and their relatives did not report any concerns in relation to discrimination and inequality. The service had an equality and diversity policy in place which staff had access to. Staff told us they knew people well and had completed training in equality, diversity and inclusion to better understand and respond to people’s needs.

This meant staff and the management team worked to improve people’s experiences and outcomes through interacting with them and their family and trying things with people to improve their lives as well as by completing relevant training.

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 had care plans in place titled ‘Advanced care planning’. These enable people to express their wishes and thoughts on planning for the future, when people anticipated their needs could change, or how they would like to be supported at the end of their lives. They detailed what was important to people, their preferences and if there was a ReSPECT form in place, as well as a copy of this if there was one.

A ReSPECT form (Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment) is used to record a person's wishes and preferences for their care, so that in an emergency, treatment can be provided in line with what matters most to them. This ensured that individuals medical and care needs were shared, enabling professionals to respect them. A copy of the ReSPECT form was found in people’s care plans.