Greenways 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.

At our last inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has remained 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 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.

Staff were responsive to people’s needs. One person told us, “If I want something, I only have to ask, they treat me very well.” Another person said, “I don’t think they could improve things because if I ask for anything, they do their best.” A third person described how staff were responsive to their emotional wellbeing and commented, “I would say they help your wellbeing; they come and talk to you.”

Staff understood the importance of putting people in control of their care by working in accordance with their routines and preferences. The registered manager explained, “We tailor support to how people want things to be done. I know the tasks have to be done but we are looking after people and we need to know their preference and how they want us to do that."

Information about people’s history, families, likes and dislikes was available in care plans. One staff member demonstrated how they knew people well. They gave an example of a person who could experience distress. The staff member was able to describe things that may trigger the person’s distress, but also what helped to reassure them and make them feel calm. We found this information aligned with what was recorded in the person’s care plan.

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 received continuity of care from a small staff team who worked with people regularly. Relatives who wished to remain involved in their family member’s care were supported and encouraged to do so. The registered manager explained, “It is about giving relatives that balance and not making them feel sidelined. We always make that phone call to let them know what is going on."

A visiting healthcare professional told us staff made appropriate referrals to nurses, dieticians or speech and language therapists when needed, and accessed emergency healthcare support for people when required.

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

The provider recognised effective communication was central to providing person centred care. People’s communication needs were assessed and any adaptations or equipment to improve communication were clearly recorded. Records reviewed for 1 person contained a care plan for hearing, sight and oral health. There was also a care plan for communication, which detailed how the person who had limited verbal communication was likely to respond to staff, and what this response might mean. The care plan guided staff to use a white board to write down information, making it clearer and more understandable.

During our inspection was saw staff took time to speak to people on their level and positioned themselves in a way that supported effective communication.

Processes were in place to provide people with information in a format that suited their needs. Accessibility measures were reviewed to ensure they remained effective.

The provider did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas and tell them what had changed as a result.

Systems for gathering people’s views needed further development and consistency. People could not remember being involved in reviews of their care and were generally unclear about other opportunities to provide feedback about the care provided. Records demonstrated the last ‘residents meeting’ had been held in December 2025, and despite the importance of feedback being acknowledged, there was no evidence of how this had been used to inform service provision.

One relative told us they were communicated with regularly and commented, “I’ve not heard of a care plan, but we do talk about different things to do with [Name’s] health. There is an ongoing dialogue.”

The provider did not always ensure people had equality in access having considered their individual needs.

The environment was not consistently adapted to meet the needs of those living with dementia. There was very little signage or visual information around the home to support people to navigate independently. Some bedroom doors had names and photographs to help people recognise their own rooms, but others did not. This increased the risk of disorientation and reduced people’s ability to move around with confidence.

A range of mobility equipment was available to support safe movement, and people were encouraged to spend time in communal areas to support their emotional wellbeing and encourage social interactions.

There was an on-call system in the home to provide 24-hour support to staff.

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.

Staff monitored people's health and made sure people accessed other services in cases of emergency or when their physical or mental health changed. One visiting healthcare professional told us, “If people deteriorate, the staff definitely recognise this and escalate it.”

Staff understood the importance of advocating for people to ensure they experienced positive outcomes. The registered manager gave an example of how they had liaised with a healthcare professional to ensure a person had the right nutritional supplements to help maintain their skin integrity. Where people were at risk of experiencing inequalities in experiences and did not have family support, the registered manager referred them to independent advocates to ensure their voices were heard.

All staff received equality and diversity training which included unconscious bias, cultural competency and inclusive communication to promote increased awareness and understanding of equality issues.

A representative from the local church visited monthly to support people’s religious and spiritual needs.

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.

Staff were supported by doctors and district nurses when people were approaching the end of their life. Healthcare professionals told us they visited daily to administer any required medication and aimed to keep people comfortable and pain free. We received positive feedback from healthcare professionals about the support people received in their final days. One healthcare professional said the care people received prevented avoidable hospital admissions and commented, “End of life care in the home is well managed.” Another visiting healthcare professional told us, “When people are on end-of-life care, the carers are very good.”

Where people wanted to discuss how they were cared for in their final days, this was captured in an advance care plan. Where people had DNACPR (Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation) orders or advanced decisions in place, these were recorded and available to staff to ensure care delivery met people’s expressed wishes. The registered manager explained, “The most important thing is to make people feel comfortable, cared for and loved.”