Little Acres

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.

We reviewed care plans which were detailed, person centred and tailored to people’s individual needs and wishes. Where people experienced distress and agitation there were detailed, person centred ‘behaviour support’ plans in place containing information about people’s triggers and what re-direction techniques staff could use to support people and when to escalate concerns. We did note that not all language used in records was person centred but the provider had already identified this issue and was working with staff to improve this.

This ensured people were at the centre of their care.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The registered manager and staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s diverse health and care needs and our observations evidenced this and they effectively met people’s needs.

People were supported to make informed choices about their care including the appointments they accessed.

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

Staff adapted their communication to ensure people were provided with the information they needed. We saw examples of information in picture format including the menu to support people’s understanding and choice.

We observed staff using sign language to communicate with people, they considered people’s preferred communication methods and were aware of communication through people’s body language.

This meant people and staff could effectively communicate with each other which lessened the likelihood of people becoming distressed and this triggering a related behaviour.

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.

We saw the providers complaints procedure was available in an easy read format for people. We observed open communication between people, staff and management. Relatives all said they knew what to do and who to speak with if they had a complaint or concern.

Staff listened to people and responded appropriately when they communicated their needs and wishes including through facial expression and gestures.

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

We saw evidence which confirmed people had been supported to access care and treatment, including emergency care, when they needed it.

This meant people were effectively supported to access the care and treatment required in a timely way to support them to maintain their health and wellbeing.

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 were unable to provide any feedback on this, and relatives did not highlight any concerns.

We did not review any evidence which indicated people did not experience equitable outcomes in relation to their care and support.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, including moving services, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. Where people declined to discuss end of life plans this was respectfully documented. Where people had made advanced for the end of their life this was clearly recorded including DNACPR (Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation).

The registered manager was proud of the success the team had experienced when supporting people to move on after living at Little Acres and being supported to become more independent and confident. They said, “We make sure they understand what’s happening, getting them private advocates, and their needs stay at the centre of everything we do and as it will be them that feels the effect if it doesn’t go right.”

This approach ensured people were central to life changing decisions and actions.