Alexandra House - Bury

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 service made sure people were at the centre of their care and support choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care plans showed a good level of person-centred detail, showing staff had worked with people and their families to ensure their wishes and feelings were recorded. People and those important to them were actively involved with decisions about the care and support which they received. The service ensured people were at the centre of their care and support choices. Any changes in people’s needs were responded to and reflected in their records.
 

The service 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 service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care and support met their needs and preferences. The service worked well with external agencies and always sought to provide joined-up care and support in collaboration with other agencies.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People's care plans considered their communication needs including sight, hearing and speech, as well as any sensory and whether people required glasses, or hearing aids. Documentation could also be provided in large print for anybody that needed it. Comments included, “My relative is hard of hearing and the carers understand everything there is to understand about the condition and are very patient with [Person]”.

The service enabled people to share feedback, or raise complaints about their care, and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care. Records showed that where complaints had been logged there were actions taken to try to resolve them. Comments included, “We have a care plan and I believe it’s kept up to date with our involvement”.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People had access to external health professionals to promote and maintain their wellbeing. Staff, when needed could assist people to attend external appointments if needed.

The provider worked to ensure people experienced fair and equitable outcomes, recognising and responding to any individual needs that could place people at risk of inequality. Documents showed a detailed equality and diversity policy which emphasised staff responsibilities to respect and promote people’s characteristics and individuality. This approach promoted consistent, equitable care experiences for people using the service.

The provider helped people plan for significant life changes, including end of life, when this was required. The registered manager explained that when people had end of life needs, a separate care plan was created to ensure wishes and needs were met. This demonstrated preparedness to respond sensitively to future needs. During this assessment, we saw many examples of feedback provided by relatives of people who had been supported by the service prior to their death. Without exception, the feedback was overwhelming positive and demonstrated the caring values of service, carers and wider staff team.