Port Regis

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.

Not everyone’s ‘This is me’ record was completed to help staff understand important information about people and not all aspects of people’s care and support had been risk assessed. There was not always detailed guidance in place to support staff to know how to meet people’s assessed needs. For example, a person had diabetes and there was no risk assessment for their diabetes or person-centred care plan around how their health condition affected them as an individual or how staff should support the person.

Staff told us they used people’s care and support records to know about people’s care needs. A staff member said, “I know about how to care for people through their care plans and the summary of their needs and talking to the person.” Because records relating to people’s care were not always complete or accurate this meant there was a risk staff, including agency staff, would not always have access to guidance to support them to provide person-centred care for people.

However, staff were knowledgeable about most people and able to give examples of certain preferences. For example, how people liked to spend their time or routines that were important to them. A staff member said, “Person-centred care is about focusing on 1 person and talking to them."

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.

Recent improvements had been made with the introduction of new processes at the service to support better care provision and continuity for people. People’s care was discussed at daily meetings to ensure people were receiving the care and support they required and any actions were followed up promptly.

People and relatives were happy with the staff team and the care they provided. A relative told us there was a “consistent staff team.” Staff were allocated to particular parts of the service which they told us helped them to know people better.

Professionals also gave positive feedback about how the service supported joint care provision and collaborative working with other healthcare professionals. A professional told us, “They are also flexible around our visit times. As you can appreciate, it is not always possible to attend at any set time, and this flexibility supports us to ensurewe see our patients. A senior carer accompanies the clinicianto every patient, ensuring our advice is followed."

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

Information was recorded in people’s care records to indicate any sensory or communication needs they might have. For example, whether people required aids such as glasses or hearing aids and how staff should communicate with them. A person’s care plan informed staff to use a soft tone and approach the person from the front when they were communicating with the person.

Staff had completed effective communication training and we observed staff communicated with people in ways they understood. Staff altered their tone and volume to meet people’s needs.Information was displayed around the home for people such as the food menu and people were supported to maintain their post independently or with family or staff support if required.

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 registered manager told us the service had received compliments on the care delivered, although these were not being recorded at the time of our inspection. There had been no recent complaints from people or relatives.

People and relatives felt the management at the service were approachable and took action when required. A person told us they were very happy living at the service, the only complaint they had raised, a while back, had been dealt with appropriately. A relative said, “If I had any problems I would go to the owner. The owner is around which is reassuring.”

People and their relatives were involved in decisions about their care as appropriate. A relative told us, “We had a care review and spoke openly and [staff] addressed any questions.” There were ‘Resident Meetings’ carried out by the activity staff for any people who wanted to attend. The same staff member also went around to people in their rooms to ensure everyone had the option to be involved in discussions about the service such as discussions around the menu and activities. Actions were recorded at the meetings; these were then resolved and reviewed at the next meeting. The provider also completed surveys to gather feedback. Relatives were complimentary in the survey from February 2025 and any areas for improvement that were highlighted had been actioned.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. There were systems in place to support people to have equal access to care, support and treatment.

People’s needs were assessed and any additional equipment or adaptations that were required were in place. The service had working relationships with other professionals which enabled a holistic approach to people’s care and supported them to access additional support where required. A professional told us, “My experience dealing with the home has always been positive, I have a lot of contacts with the senior carers for any issue with residents…I tend to get phone calls all the time for appointments especially when they get new admissions.”

People were very positive about the activities staff and opportunities during the week to support their engagement and well-being, although some people fedback there was not much activity at the weekends.

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.

Staff adapted their communication approach with people to support their specific needs and knew the best way to enable people to participate in decisions about their experience of care. For example, a staff member said, “We show people a choice of 2 meals on show plates to help them to make choices.” This supported people to make informed decisions about what they wanted to eat. People who required hearing aids or glasses had access to these.

A professional told us people were supported to have equal experiences and outcomes. They said, “A senior carer always accompanies the clinician when they are visiting. This ensures the patient's needs are communicated when they are unable to express themselves.” The service also supported people to continue to engage in their spiritual beliefs.

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.

Appropriate documentation was in place in relation to people’s future wishes. End of life care plans were created by staff which detailed guidance about people’s end of life wishes. The service worked in partnership with the local hospice and used this for additional training, advice and support to ensure they were able to meet people’s needs. Relatives were positive about the end-of-life care and support their relations received. A relative told us, “It is dignified care. Staff are so kind and caring. They are gentle.” Another relative shared positive feedback about their experience of being supported when their relation passed away. They told us the service advocated for the person and they had passed away as they had wished.