The Old School 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 worked with people to make sure they were involved, as far as possible, in planning their care. Through familiarity, observations, and consistent routines, staff were able to anticipate and respond to people’s needs effectively. They used this knowledge to ensure people’s care plans were personalised and reflected their needs, preferences and aspirations.

Relatives were involved in care planning and staff maintained regular communication with them through phone calls and during visits. A relative told us, “The staff do reviews about [person] and somebody from the local authority rings me as well and we meet at the home for discussion. Everyone’s got [person’s] best interests in mind, we’re happy about that.”

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.

When people accessed the community, they carried ICE (In Case of Emergency) cards. These were used to communicate critical information to first responders, police, medical staff or others when people could not speak for themselves.

People also took personalised ‘grab and go bags’ with them. These contained their health booklets, drinks, snacks, sensory items, hygiene and other essentials items. They helped to ensure people were safe and had continuity of care when they left the service.
 

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

Support plans and records were created in a way that enabled people to engage in meaningful discussion and decision-making. Staff used a range of accessible communication tools to support engagement and decision-making. People had communication boards, calming boards, and support plan review boards to enable them to communicate preferences. Flash cards and basic Makaton were also used to enhance communication.

Relatives said staff were good at communicating with the people using the service. A relative told us staff communicated with their non-verbal family member by observing their body language. The relative said, “The staff have conversations with [person] and talk to them and use eye contact to do things.”

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.

Staff understood how people might respond if they were unhappy with something. For example, people objected when the main meal of the day was changed from lunchtime to the evening. After a trial period, when people made it clear they did not want this change, the main meal was changed back to lunchtime as this was what people preferred.

The provider had an effective complaints procedure. Complaints were recorded and managers investigated issues thoroughly, communicated what was happening to the complainant, and were open about what was found out and what the outcome was. The service’s complaints procedure was available in an accessible format for people who preferred this.

Relatives said managers and staff listened to them if they provided feedback on the service. A relative told us, “If I mention anything to them, they listen and take it on board.” Another relative said, “We know we can talk to staff and them to us. I can assure you we feel heard.”

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

Reasonable adjustments were made to ensure equal access to the service for all. People had communication passports detailing their preferred methods of communication, cues, and strategies that support understanding. This meant communication barriers were addressed and counteracted.

The premises and equipment were accessible. The service had a lift and other aids and adaptations to ensure people could go where they wanted to. The service had two vehicles, one of which transported a wheelchair. This ensured all the people using the service could easily travel to the places they wanted to go for activities, medical and other appointments, and visits to family and friends.

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.

Staff had a good understanding of the people using the service who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. For example, a person who was finding mealtimes challenging was given 1-2-1 staff support which meant they could enjoy communal meals with other people using the service.

People cultural needs and preferences were identified in their care plans and met. Staff were knowledgeable about these and worked with families, where applicable, to ensure people’s lifestyles reflected their cultural backgrounds.

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 relative said staff were good at managing their family member’s changing needs. They told us the person was getting a new wheelchair from the physiotherapist, so they were more secure, appointments with SALT, and dental treatment. They commented, “We feel happy and confident as [person] gets older and things change.”

Managers and staff were working with people to identify their levels of independence with a view to ensuring the service was right for them. This meant people’s short, mid, and long-term life choices, goals, ambitions and outcomes could be planned and achieved.