Chilton Care Centre

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.

Care plans were personalised and included information about people’s life histories, likes and dislikes. This helped staff to understand what was important to each person and tailor their support accordingly. Staff were knowledgeable about the content of people’s care plans and how to apply this. The registered manager told us, “Chilton Care Centre is a home from home. It is a small community where everyone knows each other, and they all look out for one another.”

People and relatives were happy with the level of person-centred care provided. One relative told us, “I have 100% trust in [registered manager’s name] and the staff. They know [person’s name] inside out."

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.

There was a strong core team of staff, and the use of agency staff was minimal which helped ensure continuity. The service had strong working links with external professionals to ensure people received timely, coordinated support from staff and professionals who knew them well. Staff worked well with professional to overcome any barriers, such as arranging appropriate transport to attend appointments.

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

Since 2016 all organisations that provide publicly funded adult social care are legally required to follow the Accessible Information Standard. The Accessible Information Standard tells organisations what they have to do to help ensure people with a disability or sensory loss, and in some circumstances, their carers, get information in a way they can understand it. It also says that people should get the support they need in relation to communication.

People had communication care plans in place which provided person-centred details in how best to communicate with the individual. Where people required additional support, such as communication books, this was put in place.

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.

A complaints policy was in place, and this has been followed. People, relatives and staff were encouraged to provided feedback at any given opportunity. Recent surveys had been sent to people, relatives and staff and the feedback was extremely positive.

The registered manager had recognised that ‘resident and relatives’ meetings were usually not well attended so feedback was minimal. As a result, the registered manager now attended regular activity sessions within the home and used this time to speak with people and their relatives to seek their views.

People and relatives told us they would have no hesitation in raising any complaints or concerns. Comments included, “I can always express my views. They listen to me and act on it” and “I have no complaints, but I would see the manager.”

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

People had access to services such as opticians, healthcare professionals, nurses, dieticians and speech and language therapists (SALT) when needed. People were supported to attend appointments such as hospital visits and to their GP. Where people were unable to express their views and did not have support from relatives, advocacy services were involved to ensure any barriers to care were removed.

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’s care records showed how staff ensured people’s human rights and protected characteristics were included and protected. Care plans included information around people’s identity and what was important to them.

Staff knew how to ensure people’s rights were protected and there was an inclusive and supportive atmosphere in the home, no matter what health or dementia related needs people had. Staff ensured people who could not advocate for themselves had a good experience of care.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, including at the end of their life, so they had enough time and information to make informed decisions about their future.

Care plans reflected people’s end of life preferences. This helped ensure their wishes were understood and respected. The registered manager was keen to do further work in this area and told us they were exploring people’s end of life wishes further once they had been living at the home for a period of time and had built a rapport with staff. The registered manage said, “I want people to feel comfortable and able to discuss their wishes. I think this is easier to do once you get to know a person and build that trust.”

Where people had Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) orders in place, this was clearly recorded in their care records. This information was also included in people’s profiles so the information for easily accessible in the event of an emergency.