Tynedale 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 the last inspection we rated this key question outstanding. At this inspection the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 64 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff could not always make sure people were at the centre of their care. The model of support restricted people's choice, control and independence. Staffing levels meant staff followed established routines rather than consistently supporting people to lead individualised lives. Care records were written in a person-centred manner and generally provided staff with information about how to support people. However, they did not always clearly describe the steps staff needed to take to meet individual needs. People described staff as kind, caring and helpful, and we observed staff supporting people in an unhurried and respectful way. Trusting relationships had also enabled some people to make positive changes in their lives. A person said, “I am really happy here and love all the staff.” The management team recognised the areas requiring improvement and had started reviewing staffing and opportunities for people to develop greater independence.

Staff understood people’s diverse health and care needs and provided joined-up and flexible care that supported choice and continuity. Staff worked collaboratively with health and social care professionals and acted as advocates to help people access appropriate care and treatment. They noticed changes in people’s physical or mental health and took timely action. Visiting professionals described staff as approachable, empathetic and responsive, and said they proactively shared concerns and kept them informed about people they supported.

The registered manager supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. There were systems to support communication. People's preferred communication methods were recorded in their care plans, however these needed to be more detailed. The provider reported some staff were trained in Makaton and British Sign Language. Picture cards and easy-read formats were available, and staff could seek advice from speech and language therapy when needed. We did not find information to show these were actively used. The registered manager recognised these shortfalls and was in the process of ensuring improvements were made.

There was a system for responding to concerns and complaints. Staff encouraged people to share feedback and ideas or raise concerns about their care and support. Staff involved people in decisions and acted on the issues they raised. People told us the registered manager and staff were approachable, and they felt listened to when they raised concerns. Relatives told us they felt involved and were kept informed about their family member's care.

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff understood people's health and care needs and worked with relevant professionals to obtain additional support. The service worked closely with the GP, speech and language therapy and district nurses and could refer people to physiotherapy and occupational therapy services. Professionals described staff as responsive and proactive and reported good communication from the service. Staff also used hospital and dental passports to provide readily available information about people's individual needs when accessing other services.

The management team listened to information about people who might experience inequality and tailored care, support and treatment in response. Staff completed equality and diversity training. People's care plans included life histories, preferences and interests and information about their physical, emotional, mental and social needs. However, the service had not effectively identified or addressed inequalities, or evaluated whether action taken had improved people’s experiences and outcomes. The limitations on people's individual experiences, such as generic menus, limited involvement in menu planning, restrictions on access to kitchens and staffing arrangements reduced some opportunities for individual choice and independence had only recently been identified. The registered manager was taking action to resolve these issues.

Staff supported people to plan for important life changes and make decisions about their future. Staff had enabled people to achieve significant changes in their lives. Professionals described how people had thrived since moving to the service. The management team was developing a more proactive and holistic approach to future planning, with a focus on enhancing people's independent living skills. The team was committed to making sure people's support was responsive and personalised.