Stambridge Meadows Care 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 under a new provider. 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 andthey decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s
needs.

We observed person-centred interactions between staff and people. Staff engaged well, using communication tailored to each individual. People we spoke with said staff understood and respected their wishes and supported them in ways that suited them. One person explained they had a preferred way of being supported with their mobility, which staff were aware of and consistently respected. People also gave examples of how staff worked flexibly around their routines and understood individual preferences. One person using the service said, “They [staff] get to know you. It makes life easier when they do.”

People told us they were supported to make choices, and relatives shared similar feedback. One relative explained their loved one was able to decide how they spent their time, such as sitting in different areas of the home and taking part in activities they enjoyed. Another relative told us, “[Relative] can make choices. They know [relative] personality.”

As already noted earlier in this report, we received mixed feedback about people’s involvement in care planning, however, the service was taking steps to improve this. Despite this, relatives told us they were kept informed of any changes to people’s needs. Comments included, “They always tell me what’s happening, especially [relative’s] key worker,” and “[Relative] has a key worker who keeps me updated about what’s going on and any changes.”
 

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.Staff worked effectively with other professionals to ensure people received coordinated care. People had regular access to their GP, which supported continuity of care. Relatives told us they felt confident their loved one’s healthcare needs were being met. One relative told us, “The GP visits once a week and if [relative] needs to see one, they put [relative] on the list. Any medical issue they attend to immediately.” Similar positive feedback was shared by all the relatives we spoke with. An external professional also described positive partnership working with the service, highlighting “open and honest information sharing” and “good communication.” They added, “We have a good relationship. They can ask questions and send us emails if anything needs updating.”
 

The provider supplied appropriate information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The service appropriately identified people’s individual communication needs to make sure information was always provided in an accessible way. The registered manager was aware of the Accessible Information Standard and could provide information in formats that met people’s communication needs. For example, information could be shared using large print, easy-read documents, or pictures. This helped ensure people could understand information and express their views in ways that suited them.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. The service had a complaints procedure in place. Records showed the registered manager investigated complaints in line with the provider’s policy.

People and their relatives told us they knew how to raise concerns or make a complaint. Many said they would speak directly with staff or the registered manager. Relatives commented, “I know who to speak to but haven’t had to raise any issues. I’m sure they would take me seriously,” and “It’s really easy to talk to anyone, and any problems are sorted.” We also reviewed records of meetings where people and their relatives shared feedback. This showed the service was listening and making changes in response, for example implementing requested activities and considering meal preferences. Although actions to be taken from these meetings were recorded, these did not always include clear timescales or target dates.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People were supported to access healthcare services when needed, including the GP, district nurses, speech and language team, and a visiting chiropodist. The service had a positive relationship with the local GP, who carried out regular visits, helping ensure people’s health needs were met promptly.

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 complied with equality and human rights requirements, taking account of people’s protected characteristics and avoiding discrimination. Staff received equality and diversity training, and care plans reflected individual needs, including any reasonable adjustments required. People’s care was tailored to support fair and consistent experiences, and people and their relatives raised no concerns about discrimination or unequal treatment.

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 and relatives, where appropriate, were consulted about end-of-life care. Where people were willing to discuss this, this was documented in their care plans. This helped ensure people’s wishes would be understood and respected should their needs change.