Glen Arun 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 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 plans were person centred and reflected their individual preferences, life histories and wishes. Care plans were updated to reflect any changes to people’s needs. Daily records showed people were receiving the care they needed. We saw there was a lively and happy atmosphere. People appeared to enjoy the company of staff. They told us they were happy with the care and support they received, and staff knew them well.

Staff knew people’s individual abilities and capabilities, which assisted staff to give person centred care. They were able to tell us in detail what support people needed and what their preferences were. For example, how people liked their drinks and what activities people liked to take part in.

People’s care was not rushed, enabling staff to spend time with them. Staff walked with people at their pace, and when communicating with them they got down to their level and gave eye contact.Staff spent time listening to people and responded to their questions. They explained what they were doing and offered reassurance. Feedback from visitors included, “[Relative] loves it here,” and, “I am very impressed.”

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.

There were systems and processes in place to ensure people’s care was regularly reviewed and updated. The provider ensured there were systems in place to share this information or changes with staff so people could receive consistent care.

Staff worked effectively with health and social care professionals to ensure people received joined up care provision and continuity. A variety of health and social care professionals visited the service on a regular basis to discuss and respond to people’s care and support needs.

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

People and, where appropriate, their relatives were provided with information about the service in formats that met their needs. Staff were aware of people’s communication needs, what this meant for people and how to offer support with this. Notice boards were on display throughout the service providing people with relevant information. People were able to access a copy of their care plan if they wanted.

We saw that a weekly email was sent to relatives providing information regarding the planned activities, the menu for the week and any other key messages regarding Glen Arun. Feedback from a relative included, ‘The home keeps in constant touch with us and keep us very well informed on everything relating to [relative] and what goes on 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 were supported to continue engaging in activities and hobbies that interested them. People’s preferences were sought through conversations with staff.

Staff told us the deputy manager was open to suggestions, and they felt confident any issues raised would be dealt with. Staff were given regular opportunities through handovers and staff meetings to express ideas. Staff told us they felt valued and involved in the running of the service.

The provider and deputy manager had processes in place to gain feedback from people and their relatives. Residents’ meetings and relatives’ meetings took place regularly and suggested changes were taken onboard by management. For example, changes to people’s individual menu to include any specific likes or dislikes. There was also a robust complaints procedure in place to allow people to express any concerns they may have. Documents showed that this has been followed effectively.

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

Staff supported people to access healthcare appointments and helped to advocate on people’s behalf when needed. People were supported with mobility aids where needed, and the premises were accessible, including the use of a lift to the second floor so people could move around the home safely. These arrangements helped ensure that people, regardless of their needs, could access healthcare, move freely around the home and continue with everyday routines. Activity sessions supported people’s mental and emotional well-being by engaging them to interact with others. There were various organised group activities, and one to one sessions for people who wished to stay in their rooms. During our visit we saw people well engaged with the activities.

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’s diverse needs and wishes were assessed, documented and respected. The provider had an equality and diversity policy and procedure in place and staff had received training to understand this. People were encouraged to share their wishes. Surveys and feedback from relatives showed people felt listened to, and their views were used to improve care.They told us staff listened, and they were able to have open conversations with staff. People gave examples of how their wishes regarding who delivered their care was respected.

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 were cared for and supported at the end of their lives. People’s care plans included information about their end of life wishes where they had chosen to discuss them, helping staff understand what mattered to each person. Staff worked collaboratively with external professionals to ensure people were comfortable as they approached the end of their lives, and anticipatory medicines were in place when needed to manage symptoms promptly. People’s wishes for treatment and care were recorded in their Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment [ReSPECT] forms, and relatives’ preferences for being involved in a person’s final days and hours were known to staff, helping ensure care remained aligned with what people and their families wanted. A relative told us, “The palliative care is very impressive. It has exceeded expectations.” This was echoed by other relatives who provided feedback.