St Georges Court Care Home

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained/changed to 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 was previously in breach of regulation 9 (Person-centred care) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. At this inspection, we found improvements had been made to the provider's oversight to ensure that person-centred care was always being provided. The provider was no longer in breach of this regulation.

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 and managers were committed to providing support which was tailored to meet people’s individual choices and preferences.People and relatives were engaged in the process of care planning and reviewing their care plans.

Relatives described staff as treating people as individuals and respecting their personal histories and preferences. A relative discussing all the improvements to the service and their family members care and appearance also mentioned that “[They] always get ready and have their lipstick on.” This was important for the person and staff ensured this was respected.

People were offered choices in their daily routines and encouraged to engage in meaningful activities. On the day of our visit, when we arrived people were partaking in a flower pressing activity in the morning. A church service was arranged for the afternoon. People told us they were given a choice whether to attend activities, and although always encouraged, staff respected their choice to attend or not.

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 told us they were happy with the care they received and felt supported by staff who knew them well. Care plans contained person-specific information about what mattered to people, including their routines, preferences, and important relationships.

Staff received training relevant to the needs of people they supported. There was evidence people were supported to attend health and social care appointments and that staff coordinated with other professionals to ensure continuity across services. Information about other agencies involved in each person’s care was documented in their records, supporting effective multi-agency working.

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

The provider had suitable policies in place to ensure information about the service was readily available to people and families, and was able to adapt information to various formats where this was needed.

The registered manager offered regular residents and carers meetings which enabled information to be present verbally and face to face. For those not able to attend they would be provided with the information either in person, over the telephone or in writing.

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.

Policies and procedures were in place to manage and respond to complaints effectively. People and relatives felt able to speak to the registered manager about any issues or concerns and felt confident that this matter should be addressed. One person was able to tell us about an issue they had raised with the registered manager, how it was dealt with and the positive outcome, they also said, “[They] did believe me, I never felt that they were just listening for the sake of listening.”

Outcomes from suggestions made at residents’ meetings included changes to the music in the hallways and the opportunity for people to grow their own plants and herbs.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The provider ensured people had access to services such as podiatrists, dieticians, opticians and dentists. The service also had a well-equipped hair salon on site which was well attended. People and families were very confident that the provider would arrange for support where this was needed.

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 reported no concerns related to discrimination or unequal experiences. Staff made deliberate efforts to personalise care based on individual identity and experiences. The dementia lead for the service showed us that they have developed communication cards for people in different languages, including, happy sad, pain. This had helped people communicate effectively their immediate need so that staff can support them in real time.

Cultural awareness was incorporated into care, helping reduce disparities and promote equitable experiences. Staff used their knowledge of people’s background history to engage with people, and adapted the care and support offered to meet this need. Relatives told us this was done automatically and not something they needed to request.

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’s wishes and preferences for end-of-life care were discussed with them and their loved ones and clearly recorded in care plans. Staff demonstrated commitment to respecting these choices and maintaining up-to-date plans.

The registered manager worked closely with healthcare professionals to ensure Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) orders were up to date and reviewed when they needed to be.