The Gables

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 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Care plans described people’s needs and were personalised, although some areas required improvements. Some people’s clinical care plans required further detail to ensure staff were aware of what process to follow if a person’s condition declined. Some care plans had been updated and changes in people’s risk scoring were inconsistent. This may pose a risk to people as the service was using agency staff. Whilst we saw no impact to people, we shared this with leaders, who had identified the need for improvement with personalising clinical and care plan information following an internal auditing process. This was currently being reviewed by a consultancy member of staff. Peoples care plans were amended and shared with us during the inspection process. The service provided us with several examples of where staff had gone the extra mile and supported people to attend family weddings which involved travelling and being away from home.

Care provision, integration and continuity Score: 4

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. Healthcare professionals were involved in advising and supporting the care people received. There were regular healthcare professionals who visited the home, these included district nurses, GP’S and ANP’s. Healthcare professionals we spoke with shared positive feedback about the service and praised staff for following good practice and having effective communication. There were several other providers which visited the service to offer different activities and group sessions, local musicians, children’s extracurricular groups, art therapy, local schools, the parish vicar and a childminder were all regular visitors, there was also a toddler group which visited the home on a regular basis. The Gables was also connected to other local providers and had hosted fundraisers to raise money for local charities.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People’s communication needs were assessed and documented in their care plans and staff demonstrated good knowledge of Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The provider had an AIS poster which informed people of how they could choose to receive their information. People told us they were provided with details of what activities were taking place and menus to choose their food choices. People were also shared resident meeting minutes when they chose not to attend, one person told us, “I used to go to resident’s meetings, I don’t go anymore, but they push the notes under my door, so I know what going on”. Relatives told us they were kept updated with changes in relation to their loved one’s needs and said communication with the service was good.

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. Due to some recent management changes at the service the operations manager had shared updates and gathered feedback from people, relatives, staff and external professionals. An external human resources professional spoke with all staff independently to encourage their views on the service. The feedback had been reviewed, and actions were being taken where it had been suggested improvements were needed. The Gables gathered annual feedback from people using the service, their families and staff in the form of surveys. An action plan from surveys was produced in July 2025 where each issue was identified, an action agreed with a designated person to complete it within a specific timescale. People and relatives told us they knew where to raise a complaint and would speak directly with either a staff member, senior or a leader. One person told us, “I would speak to the staff if I had a problem, the manager and office staff are always around”. Another person said, “The home has been great, I worked in care, so I set my stall out from day one. They listen and respond to my suggestions for (relative). I visit 2 to 3 times a week at random times”. There was a digital reception system in place enabling visitors to leave feedback at the end of each visit. The management team also actively monitored and responded to online feedback received.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. This was evidenced in people’s care plans care which provided staff with an overview of people’s needs and any barriers they might experience in receiving care, support and treatment. For example, mobility and accessibility or communication barriers. Referrals were made to external professionals when it had been identified by the service they were required. External health professionals told us staff were prompt to ask for additional support when needed and were responsive to any changes or amendments they suggested with people’s care planning. There was an on-call system in place to provide support to people and staff if needed.

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 ensured people were supported to have equitable outcomes. People and their relatives did not report any concerns related to discrimination or unequal experiences. All staff had completed the relevant mandatory training requirements.

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 detailed people’s specific choices and decisions. People had ReSPECT forms in place. ReSPECT stands for Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment and ensures their personal wishes are followed. These were reviewed regularly by people, relatives and the Advanced Care Planner.