St Anns Healthcare - Main Office

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.

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.

Care plans and records were not always reflective of some people’s current needs and therefore not always person-centred. People and relatives, we spoke with described the care as being person-centred and spoke positively about the care that was being delivered. One relative said, “The staff are very well trained to deliver person-centred care. The service provides overnight care, for my relative and another company provide the daytime. I cannot fault the care that St. Ann’s provide.” People were consulted with about changes to their needs or decisions about them. Feedback from care and office staff showed people were considered as individuals and care was planned around them.

Staff confirmed they always had sufficient information about people to enable them to support them safely. People and family members also confirmed they had access to their care plans via the electronic system.

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.

People and relatives we spoke with were very satisfied with the care and treatment they received. The service worked flexibly and in a joined-up way with relatives to ensure peoples’ preferences and needs were noted and catered for. People told us they had a regular team of staff who visited and knew them well. One person told us, “I am really happy. I have 3 regular carers who are really good. They arrive on time 3 times a day.”

The management team understood how and when to share information or make referrals for specialist assessments or support. An external professional said they had, “Good communication from the [registered] manager.”

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

People's communication needs were identified during their initial assessment and care records provided information about what people's communication requirements were and were considerate of the Accessible Information Standards.

People and family members did not identify any communication issues with care staff. Care records were kept electronically. Relatives told us they were kept informed when changes happened in peoples’ care needs. Information was kept securely as possible.

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 provider had a complaints procedure in place people and family members were provided with information as to how to complain. People and family members were also able to raise concerns via surveys or during visits by senior staff for care reviews or field supervisions of care staff. There was a process to record and investigate concerns and complaints.

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

People’s needs and what reasonable adjustments they needed had been implemented to ensure people had equal access to services. There was an on-call system covered by the management team to ensure out of hours support was available to ensure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Discussions with the registered manager and office staff showed they understood how to access specialist health or social care support should this be required.

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 treated equally and their care and treatment adapted to meet their individual needs. Care staff had access to policies and completed a range of training to support their understanding of people’s rights, discrimination and inequalities. People and family members did not identify any concerns about discrimination or protected characteristics.

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.

The service could provide end of life care where this became appropriate. The registered manager described how they would link with the local hospice and community nurses to help ensure people received all necessary support. People’s wishes for their end of life care had been discussed where relevant and noted. Staff had received appropriate training in delivering end of life care and worked jointly with the community nurses.