Merlin Manor 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 service met people’s needs. At the last inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (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 did not always ensure care was consistently person-centred. Care planning systems were designed to support person-centred care, with detailed assessments completed with people and their families and regular reviews undertaken. Staff understood people’s individual needs, preferences and life histories, and people and relatives described care staff as kind and compassionate. However, staff told us they did not always have time to read care plans and often “just learn as we go along,” which increased the risk of care becoming task-focused. Staffing pressures were also reported to limit the delivery of personalised care, including delays in responding to people and reduced time to provide one-to-one support. A staff member said, “I don’t feel there is enough time or staff to complete the work at times. The staff to resident ratio which the company follows does not reflect the needs of the residents sufficiently. For example, individuals with complex behaviours, advanced dementia or who are frail or approaching the end of life often need more time, support and reassurance but the units are all staffed on the same ratio, no matter the needs of the individuals. This has been raised several times, and I believe management were looking into it but I’m unsure what the outcome was.”

Staff worked closely with a range of healthcare professionals, including GPs, community matrons and specialist teams, to ensure people’s health needs were met. Relatives and professionals told us referrals were made promptly when concerns arose and that staff monitored people’s health effectively. Visiting professionals spoke positively about communication with staff and their knowledge of people’s needs. Systems such as daily flash meetings supported continuity of care by sharing key information across teams. Generally, relatives felt staff kept them informed about changes in people’s health and were involved in discussions about care and treatment. This helped families feel reassured and supported.

Staff generally ensured people and their families received information in ways they could understand, but this was not always consistent. Systems were in place to support accessible communication. People had communication care plans, and information was available in different formats, including easy-read materials and pictorial tools. Staff also demonstrated an understanding of people’s communication needs and adapted their approach where required. Relatives told us they could usually obtain information about their family members and felt able to speak with staff when needed. The service also used notice boards, newsletters and digital updates to share information about activities and daily life.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people, as much as possible, in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. People and relatives told us staff were approachable and responsive. They felt able to raise concerns and said these were usually listened to and addressed.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The management team understood the diverse needs of people and aimed to provide care, which is joined-up, flexible and supports choice and continuity. Staff understood the diverse needs of the people and worked flexibly to ensure everyone received appropriate support.

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. The management team ensured peoples’ social and healthcare needs were fully considered and met. The team worked with advocacy services and ensured people could access external healthcare professionals when needed. Staff training and policies supported inclusive practice and awareness of equality and human rights. People were supported to see services such as GPs and specialist teams, helping to promote equitable access to healthcare.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including planning for the future. Care planning included consideration of people’s future needs, with assessments and reviews supporting changes in condition over time. Staff worked proactively with healthcare professionals to ensure appropriate care and treatment were in place as people’s needs changed. Staff demonstrated a strong commitment to end-of-life care. Staff were described as skilled in supporting people with complex health needs and in providing compassionate care at the end of life. We observed coordinated care for people approaching end of life, with staff responding to changing needs and maintaining comfort.