Tower View 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 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 make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

The provider did not ensure they were working with people to develop goals which promoted independence control and choice. People told us they wanted to be more independent within their home, but leaders had not identified this is what people wanted through reviews and assessments. For example, 1 person wished to move to a new more independent environment. Although they were being supported to take some of their daytime medicines independently, support plans did not demonstrate there were plans to develop other skills to enable them to be able to manage independently when they moved. Further, they had not been supported to manage a budget, complete their shopping or complete domestic tasks within the house. This meant they were not being enabled to develop skills they wanted when moving on.

There provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was always joined-up, flexible and supportive of choice and continuity.

Leaders ensured people attended health appointments and reviews as needed. The service had good links with the local mental health team and liaised with them as required. Other professionals shared staff engaged with them in relation to people as required.

Rather than always support people to make their own appointment with their doctor people often went to Tower House and saw the doctor as part of the weekly ward round there. This meant people were not being encouraged to access the doctors as others would.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People told us information was shared with them in an appropriate way. They knew they could ask staff for support if the needed in in relation to accessing any information.

Staff shared the ensured people were supported to ensure they knew when they had appointments, including when people were not well when they had more support as they may not be so able to read and understand information.

We saw there was relevant information about raising complaints accessible for people within the home.

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 told us staff were approachable and that they knew how to raise any concerns and felt they would be listened to. We saw people were comfortable to speak to staff when they were in the home.

There were house meeting where people could discuss plans and any issues they may have. The provider had a complaints policy which people could follow if needed.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Leaders ensured all the people were supported appropriately in relation to their individual needs. We saw in care records that staff were supporting people to access medical appointments, dentists and the optician as needed. Staff ensured people had access to the appropriate specialist support as they needed it.

People told us they did not have any problem accessing the appropriate support but if they had the manager identified how they would help them when needed to overcome any access issues.

People’s needs assessments were reviewed regularly by the manager with people to ensure they reflected people’s wishes and needs.

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 manager could demonstrate they were aware of potential barriers for people.

People told us they felt they were treated with equity by staff and the manager. They felt they could speak to staff about any concerns they may have and that they would be listened to. Staff could tell us about the people they supported and could identify their differing support needs. They were clear that people should be treated as individuals during times they were supporting them,

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. One person had expressed a desire to move to a supported living environment. Staff were working with them to ensure this move could happen.

There were end of life plans for those people who wanted to engage with this planning. Staff had recorded peoples wishes in their care plans.