Archived: Cumberland

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 service 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 service 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 told us staff treated them as individuals and they received consistently good, person-centred care and support from staff who were familiar with their needs, preferences and daily routines. For example, we observed a person enjoying a hot meal that reflected their cultural heritage which staff confirmed they often liked to eat for their lunch.

Staff demonstrated good awareness of people’s individual needs and preferences. Staff were familiar with the term ‘person-centred’ and what this meant in terms of supporting people living at the care home. A member of staff told us, “We read peoples individual care plans and by working with all residents we get to know how to support them in a person-centred way.”

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People told us staff understood their care needs and that they worked well with multiple external health and social care professionals to consistently meet those needs. People received care and support from services that understood the diverse health and social care needs of their local communities. There is also continuity in people’s care because services were flexible and joined up and delivered in a way that meets their assessed needs.

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

The provider ensured people were given information in a way they could understand.

People told us they were provided with accurate and up-to-date information in formats that we tailored to their individual communication needs.

Information about people’s communication needs, and preferences had been identified and was included in their care plan. Managers were aware of their responsibility to meet people’s communication needs and make information accessible. Managers and staff confirmed they could supply people with information about the service in accessible formats as and when this was requested.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. People, and those important to them, took part in making decisions and planning of their care.

People told us they had regular opportunities to speak to the managers and staff and they felt listened to and involved in making decisions about the care and support they received. For example, people’s views were sought in relation to planning the food menus, social activities programme and how they liked to spend their day. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

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

The provider had made improvements since our last inspection. People now had sufficient opportunities to engage in meaningful activities that reflected their social interests. The service had a designated activities and sensory room which was well resourced and equipped. A member of staff told us, “We regularly take one person who lives here who likes to go out to the local park and the pub once a week.”

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 engaged and supported by staff to be included and have the same opportunity as others to receive the care and support of their choice. Staff had received equality and diversity training and understood people had a right to be treated equally and fairly, and to receive care and support that met their specific needs. For example, managers and staff confirmed people had the right to choose the gender of staff who provided their intimate personal care.

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 nearing the end of their life were supported to have a comfortable and dignified death. People and their families were supported to be involved in discussions and participate in decisions about their future care needs and end of life wishes. People’s care records included a section where individual’s end of life care and support needs and wishes were recorded. Where people and their families did not want to discuss end of life care wishes this decision was recorded in a person’s care plan. Staff had received end of life care training.