Upton Grange Residential 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 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.

Staff and the management team demonstrated a good understanding of the people they supported. One staff member stated, "I get to know the resident, their likes and dislikes."

Most care plans contained sufficient detail about how people’s specific health conditions should be managed. For individuals who had recently moved into Upton Grange Residential Home, some care plans did not yet include all personal information such as life histories or hobbies and interests. These care plans were still being developed as staff spent more time with people and gained a better understanding of their preferences. Care plans were reviewed regularly, with personalised information added as staff became more familiar with each person.

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 clear evidence of effective multidisciplinary working. External professionals were involved in people’s care planning and confirmed that staff escalated concerns appropriately to obtain additional support when needed. Consistent staffing helped promote continuity of care. A relative told us, "They don't have a high staff turnover, which is a positive."

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

Pre‑admission documentation included detailed information about people’s communication needs, ensuring staff were aware of and able to plan for these prior to individuals moving in. A range of accessible formats was available for those who required alternatives, such as large print, braille, audio versions and British Sign Language. Daily menus were clearly displayed outside the dining room so people knew what was available. One person required a whiteboard to support their communication; this was sourced on the day they moved into the service to ensure their needs were met promptly.

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.

People and their relatives told us they understood how to provide feedback or raise a complaint. They confirmed that regular meetings and surveys were in place, giving them the opportunity to share their views. Most relatives said they were kept informed about their family member’s care. One relative told us, "Yes, they email me if anything happens or if there are any updates from the doctor." Another relative said they did not receive routine updates, although they explained they asked for information during their weekly visits.

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

Staff took time to understand each person’s individual characteristics and needs. They worked collaboratively with people and their relatives to ensure these were fully reflected in care planning. Staff had access to emergency numbers and an on‑call rota to ensure support was always available, helping to maintain uninterrupted access to services during emergencies. The registered manager also told us that additional staff were brought in when people required an escort to attend appointments, ensuring normal staffing levels within the home were maintained.

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 was tailored to their individual needs. Care plans identified where specific equipment or adjustments were required, helping to remove any potential barriers to receiving appropriate support. For example, staff recognised that a newly admitted person did not have their wheelchair with them and promptly arranged for a family member to bring it in. This ensured the person could receive the correct level of assistance with their mobility. The provider had an up‑to‑date equality, diversity and human rights policy, which supported staff to ensure people were treated fairly and without discrimination, regardless of age, sex, race, disability or religious belief.

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.

At the time of our inspection, no one was receiving end of life care. However, all staff had completed training in end of life care to ensure they were prepared to support people when required.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, giving them sufficient time to make informed decisions about their future. The provider took people’s wishes into account when planning future events, and people were given opportunities to discuss and record their preferences.