The Emilie Galloway Home of Rest

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.

Care plans reflected people’s individuality and identified any preferences they may have. People were supported to get up when they wished, and on arrival we were advised of the people whose care needs made their mornings a little slower, so we could ensure we approached them later in the day once they were up and settled. One person told us, “I am in bed early and get up about 4am.” The service facilitated this lifestyle choice, evidencing they supported a routine that suited people.People were invited to attend, and be included, in group activity sessions and individual outings. Staff offered people choices of food and drink and ensured that everyone was treated as an individual. Staff completed training to understand how to assist people in a person-centred way. Daily notes evidenced this, documenting staff responses to individual’s needs. This approach was started from the pre-admission assessment with a person telling us, “I wanted an ensuite bathroom, it was important to me” and being provided with a room that met their expressed wishes. People and their families confirmed they were included in updates and made aware of any required changes to care and treatment.

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 collaborated with partner services and made sure all information was up to date. Relevant documentation was continually updated to reflect any changes to care needs as they happened. We observed the registered manager contacting the surgery to request a change to a person’s health document, updating the address details so it remained current. People were supported to access the local community for health appointments, activities or social time such as coffee trips to cafes. We were unable to access professional feedback so there are no documented views or comments from partner services.

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

People living at the home had minimal communication needs and were able to process and understand information in usual formats. They had various notice boards with information displayed that informed people about health and safety issues, planned activities and supportive services such as advocacy. The registered manager understood how to provide information in accessible formats like picture cards, large print or braille, to support people with any developing impairments or sensory needs. Data protection requirements were adhered to, and all relevant records were completed 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.

The home was proactive in involving people with all aspects of care and treatment decisions. Resident’s meetings were held regularly. Specific menu planning meetings were held every 6 months with the chef and registered manager, giving people opportunity to suggest meal options and decide what they would like on the next 4-week menu. Feedback surveys were carried out, and any required actions or changes were communicated back to people and to the care team. People told us they knew how to raise a complaint should they wish to and felt confident they would be listened to by the registered manager if they approached them.

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

Many people living at the home retained much of their independence and as such were supported to manage their own affairs relating to healthcare and treatment. Some people were able to arrange their own appointments and go out independently as required. Staff were able to assist others in liaising with healthcare professionals and accessing the medical support they needed. The home provided people with staff escorts if they needed accompanying when leaving the home. The home itself was easily accessible with a level side entrance allowing anyone with mobility limitations to avoid the front stairs. There was a lift to all floors and a stair lift for those who required extra support. Care records showed that all people had regular checks throughout the day and night and were assisted whenever they needed help.

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 positive about their experience of living at Emilie Galloway and felt staff had a good understanding of their needs and the support required. The registered manager understood the impact moving into a care environment could have on people and ensured that everyone felt welcomed and valued. Policies were in place to support equality and care plans documented support given to improve people’s experiences. For example, people were provided with appropriate mobility aids to assist in mobilising, and the home had an electric wheelchair to aid people accessing the community. Activities were able to be tailored to individual’s taste and capabilities. There was a range of activities on the planner with new options continually being explored, for example the activity co-ordinator had recently linked with a knitting project in a nearby town and was looking to introduce a visiting therapy dog as many people loved animals and missed being pet owners.

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.

Care plans contained details of people’s wishes and future arrangements as they had been expressed. Some people had a ReSPECT plan, Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment, which outlined care preferences for when they might be unable to express their wishes. This included information about end-of-life care and resuscitation. Not everyone had this but those in place were accessible to staff should they be needed. Pre-paid funeral plans were already in place for some people, with relevant details recorded in the care plan. People told us they knew who the registered manager was if they wished to talk with them about any personal information or advanced plans. Staff had completed training in how to safely care for people at the end of their lives should anyone need this level of support. We received feedback from staff about how supportive the registered manager was when providing end of life care, and that they would sit with people and ensure they had company in their last days.