Admiral Jellicoe House Also known as The Royal Naval Benevolent Trust

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 did not assess enough quality statements to rate this key question. At this assessment this key question has been rated 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 person centred to ensure care was provided in accordance with people’s individual needs and preferences. For example, people were supported with personal care in a way and at a time of their choosing to help reduce their anxieties.

People were offered a wide range of meaningful activities. During our on-site inspection visits numerous activities took place, including external singers coming in and a visit from a local mothers-and-baby group. We observed some people were enthusiastically participating in these activities.

People living with Dementia were supported in an environment which was personalised and promoted positive interactions with people who had the same interests.

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.

Relatives told us, there relatives had access to healthcare professionals, including, doctors, district nurses, physiotherapists and chiropodists.

The registered manager gave us examples of when they had collaborated with other professionals to ensure care was joined up. They also told us some people’s preferred professionals visited them in the home which helped alleviate some people’s anxieties. This helped to remove some of the barriers to care.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People’s communication needs and preferences were clearly recorded in care plans.

People had communication aids in place, including mobile phones, electronic tablets and communication boards.

Numerous large print documents were available, and the manager evidenced how these had been used to support people. This meant people could make their needs and wishes known to staff.

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 day-to-day care and told them what had changed as a result.

People living in the home were asked for their views in a variety of formats throughout the year, these included in daily conversations, in meetings, and through surveys. Action plans were devised from these meetings and survey’s and were shared with people. This meant people’s views were listened to and drove improvement. The manager told us, where needed they engaged the use of advocacy services to ensure people were heard.

People and their relatives were aware of how to complain and were confident any complaints would be acted upon.

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

Each person had a hospital passport in place. This could be shared with other professionals to reduce potential barriers to care within the health and social care system. We reviewed these documents and noted areas where additional information could be added to aid other professionals supporting the person. The provider was responsive and told us they would add this information.

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 treated people as individuals and made reasonable adjustments for anyone who needed them. Staff understood how the Equality Act applied to their role.

The registered manager told us, “We advocate for people. We are all happy to challenge anything we are not happy with.”

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.

Some people had end of life plans in place which included where people would want to be cared for at the end of their life and plans for their funerals which included religious preferences. People’s relatives had also been involved in this process.

The registered manager told us, “We are doing more work on this, especially where families do not want to discuss end of life care. We have put together a document to send to all relatives. We are adding it to our pre-assessment form. We are also trying to link in with local hospices to provide additional training for our staff.”

People were supported to attend the funerals of their friends who lived within the home. They were supported to wear their military uniforms and medals.