Mainwaring Terrace

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.

People’s care reflected their individual preferences, routines and what mattered to them. Staff described how they tailored daily support and activities to match people’s needs and choices. They also explained how they managed support in a way that respected people’s home environment and reduced avoidable disruption, while still making sure people received the help they needed.

Care plans showed that the provider involved people in planning their care. Records demonstrated co-production, including confirmation by signature. Risk records included activity-specific entries, which showed staff considered individual goals and preferences when planning support and making changes. Families confirmed that staff respected people’s choices and adapted support when needed.
 

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.

Staff worked with external professionals to make sure people received coordinated care that met their needs. Staff described regular GP calls and timely contact with other health professionals when people needed additional support. They also worked with pharmacy teams to support safe medicines processes and used input from professionals such as occupational therapists to inform care and respond when needs changed.

Staff kept hospital passports in each person’s file so key information could be shared quickly if people needed support from other services. This helped maintain continuity and reduced the need for people and families to repeat information. Families told us they felt kept informed and gave examples of timely access to healthcare, including dental care.
 

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

Staff gave people information in ways that supported understanding and choice. They used easy-read materials, pictorial labels and other communication aids, including tablet devices, to help people take part in everyday decisions and understand what was happening.

Relatives told us information was shared clearly when they asked for it. One relative said, “I asked for a printout, and it was there when I went to pick him up.” This showed the provider responded to requests promptly and shared information in a way that was useful to people and those close to them.

The provider clearly recorded each person’s communication preferences and the formats they need, and reviewed this information regularly to keep it accurate and up-to-date.
 

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.

Families told us staff listened and acted on suggestions. One relative said, “They were washing his clothes and putting them back on the top of the pile. I suggested they put them to the bottom, which they do.” This showed staff responded to feedback quickly and made practical changes that mattered to people. Staff also explained how they used communication aids to help people who were non-verbal to share their views and choices. They described working with specialists, including positive behaviour support professionals, to understand triggers for anxiety and make changes to support people in ways that reduced distress.

The provider used more than one way to gather feedback. While response rates to surveys were limited, leaders described other routes that helped them listen to people, staff and families. For example, the Assurance and Compliance team spoke with people, staff and families during audit visits to gather feedback and identify improvements.
 

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

People and families did not report any barriers to accessing care, support or treatment. Staff told us they provided support consistently and responded when people needed help. Care records showed the provider could make reasonable adjustments where needed, so people could access support in a way that worked for them. We did not receive any concerns about discrimination, exclusion or delays in accessing care.
 

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 provider took steps to check that people’s day-to-day experiences and outcomes were fair and consistent. They used their engagement records and checks with staff and families to look for signs that anyone was having a poorer experience or missing out on opportunities. The provider’s review did not identify any differences in people’s experiences or outcomes. Families said staff listened and responded when they raised suggestions, and people were supported as individuals.

Staff tailored support so people could take part in daily life in ways that worked for them. For example, they adapted communication using tools such as Makaton and, they adjusted routines and environments in response to people’s individual needs and preferences. This reduced barriers that can lead to unequal experiences for people with a learning disability or autistic people, and supported people to have choice, control and independence.
 

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.

The provider had arrangements in place to support future planning, including advance care planning where this was relevant. Records showed advance care planning documentation was kept in people’s paper files. This helped staff keep a record of people’s wishes and the decisions that had been made about future care.

Families shared their views about future arrangements. The provider recorded people’s preferences, including where people wanted to stay living at the home, and staff respected these preferences in how they planned support. Advocacy was offered where people needed support to be involved in discussions and decisions about the future.