The Laurels and The Limes Care 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 changed to requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.

This service scored 61 (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. Staff knew people well but were often task focused and did not always deliver care in line with people’s care plans and personal preferences. The current management team were devising ways to improve this. People were supported to personalise their bedrooms and had access to items that provided comfort to them such as photos and mementos.

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. People were assisted to access other professionals as required. Information received as recommendations from other professionals was documented and care plans. However, these could be improved to show people were supported in line with advice given.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Information was available for people throughout the home to assist people to understand daily information. For example, the daily menu, activity planner, and the complaints procedure. However, this was not always up to date. For example, the menu was displayed in picture format, but this was not in line with the meal that was served. This meant information provided was not always accurate.

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. The management team sought feedback from people and displayed the findings as a ‘you said, we did,’ display. Monthly resident meetings took place to ensure feedback was captured by people who used the service. The provider had a complaints procedure and responded to concerns appropriately. People and relatives told us they would raise concerns with the interim manager and felt they would address them.

The provider did not always make sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Some people did not have easy access to outside garden space. This limited the times they could enjoy this space. The manager told us they would look at ways to improve people’s experience. However, people were able to access the community and attended events such as a local tea dance on a regular basis.

Staff and leaders did not always actively listen to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. This meant people’s care was not always tailored in response to this. People did not always receive care that reflected their individual needs and preferences. Improvements were required to people's meal-time experience, people were observed in both The Laurels and The Limes to be sat for long periods of time waiting for meals. People became tired of waiting and this impacted on their mealtime experience and what they ate. Some people were using equipment that was not assessed for them. The interim manager told us they had identified these concerns and were looking for ways to resolve them. We have received confirmation from the current management team that a full inventory of wheelchairs had commenced to ensure people were using wheelchairs appropriate to their assessed needs.

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. People’s care plans included information about their end of life wishes. Careful thought had been given to ensuring people’s end of life preferences were documented.