Good Shepherd Nursing 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.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated Good.This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 68 (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.

People’s care and treatment was not always effective due to their care and support needs not always being robustly documented for staff to follow to support them. For example, where people required repositioning at specific intervals during the day and night.

Staff kept records on how they had supported people and at what time. However, we found a lack of consistency in these daily records for repositioning and skin body maps for some people. This also impacted on staff being unable to accurately and promptly review any changes required to a person’s needs. For example, where a person’s skin management needs may require review by an external professional.

Staff treated people and their relatives with respect and kindness and showed a person-centred approach when engaging with people. Relatives we spoke with were positive about the staff, one told us, “The staff are all so kind, so good with my family member. They react well to the staff.”

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.

The service worked well with external health and social care partners. We saw prompt referrals had been made to support people who may need specialist equipment or for supporting with specialist dietary needs. A visiting health professional spoke of their positive relationship with the service, saying, “The staff are very kind and caring. They always have a staff member available to talk with me when I visit.”

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

One relative felt communication with them could be improved. Particularly in relation to clinical details. They told us, “We don’t have anything in the way of a news sheet or survey. We just get a phone call if they need to tell us something.” Another relative felt the management structure could be confusing, they told us, “All the staff are lovely. The manager is happy to talk to us, but we don’t always know who to speak to on medical things. We’ve now got a copy of my family member’s hospital discharge notes and it’s so complex about all their issues. We didn’t know who to ask when we wanted more information.”

Support plans and records met people’s requirements for meaningful communication and decision-making. Records were available for staff to enable positive communication with people about their choices when they did not use verbal communication. For example, by the use of objects of reference, sign language, or visual aids.

Care plans detailed people’s individual communication needs, such as spectacles or hearing aids.

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 and staff team made themselves available to speak with people and their relatives when needed, and on an informal basis, due to the small size of the service. Some people were unable to give feedback on their care, due to their communication needs. Where this was the case, we saw the service worked with advocates and relatives. One relative told us, “There are no newsletters or meetings held regularly, but we have the registered manager’s phone and email address and they have said we could call any time. We meet regularly with the service, and think the staff are really kind and caring.”

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

Equality and diversity policies were in place and staff had completed training in this area. Care plans detailed how people’s disabilities were considered and the support in place to enable accessibility, for example, with sensory needs.

People were supported with access to external teams when required and encouraged to maintain relationships with those who were important to them.

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 supported to maintain relationships with those who were important to them. We saw family and friends of people were able to visit when they wished and were made welcome by the staff team. One relative told us, “There’s no real restrictions, but we tend to come after 10am so my family member has been washed and is comfy. We have to ring to get let in as we can’t have the code. We’ve been given the nurse mobile in case there’s no reply.”

Relatives told us they were made welcome, and had been asked to respect protected mealtimes, where people may need extra support from staff.

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 were detailed, regarding their spirituality and communication of end of life wishes. The plans contained information on supporting access to a place of worship or a visiting faith lead.

Staff we spoke with showed compassion and empathy regarding caring for people at the end of their lives. If people did not wish to discuss their end of life wishes, we saw processes had been established for what to do in an emergency medical situation. Where people had an advanced decision in place regarding the end of their life, these were clear, for staff to ensure people’s wishes were respected.