St Andrew's Healthcare - 17 The Avenue

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 newly registered 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 the person was at the centre of their care and treatment choices, and they decided, in partnership with the person, how to respond to any relevant changes in their needs.

The person’s individual routines, preferences and what was important to them had been assessed, discussed with them and planned for. Care records, including meeting records confirmed how the person was at the heart of their care and support. Care plans had been developed and reviewed with the person as fully as possible.

Staff described a person-centred approach to care and treatment. They took the person’s cultural, psychological, physical and social needs into consideration when planning and developing care plans.

Our observations of staff supporting the person confirmed staff had a person centred approach.

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

The management team were focussed on further developing a permanent staff team to ensure the person received consistency and continuity in care. Permanent staff had developed positive relationships with the person who knew them well.

The provider knew and understood the person’s specific communication needs and had developed a supportive service for the deaf community. However, further action was required to ensure all staff supporting the person were sufficiently trained and competent in using British Sign Language.

The person was fully supported to be an active citizen of their local community. Staff supported the person to access leisure, recreational and places of their choice and important to them.

External professionals were positive and complimentary about the care and support the person received.

Care records confirmed regular contact with health and social care professionals. The provider had discharge policies and procedures to ensure good information sharing to support ongoing and future consistency and continuity of care.

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

For example, the person had access to easy read information such as what they could expect from the service, and how they could make a complaint. We also saw examples of care plans and records that included the use of pictures to support the person’s communication.

The provider had a data protection policy and procedure and understood their responsibilities under the Accessible information standards. However, the person’s care records were not stored in lockable storage, meaning there was a risk the person’s confidential information may have been accessed by others not authorised to do so. The management team were aware of this and told us they were addressing this issue.

The provider made it easy for the person to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved the person in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The person was involved in all aspects of their care and support, including attending multi-disciplinary team meetings and being involved in the development on ongoing reviews of their care plans.

An advocate visited the person and supported them when attending meetings.

Staff met with the person regularly to discuss how they were doing, any required changes to the house, garden, independence and community opportunities.

The provider also had quality assurance procedures that enabled the person, staff and external professionals to share their experience of the service. Feedback was used to develop and improve the service.

The provider had a compliant policy and procedure, and this had been made available to the person. At the time of the inspection, no complaints had been received.

The provider made sure that the person could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The person had equal access to care and support, and did not experience any barriers. Equality and human rights, including the person’s protected characteristics were known understood and planned for.

For example, the person had access to interpreters who supported them to attend meetings and health appointments if required. The person had access to all parts of the service.

The person was supported to attend health services with care staff that knew them well, this was confirmed by external healthcare professional feedback received.

The staff rota confirmed the person was supported in accordance with their assessed needs. Staff had access to out of hours management support in the event of an emergency requiring additional support and guidance.

Staff and leaders actively listened to the person to ensure the person did not experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

We received no concerns in relation to discrimination or inequality.

The provider had systems and processes that monitored the person’s progression and outcomes. Care plans and records confirmed how the person’s care and support was provided, monitored and reviewed. Goals and aspirations were recorded, planned for and reviewed.

Staff were confident the person did not experience any inequalities; they gave examples of how the person was supported to achieve positive outcomes.

The person was 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 person was supported by staff to identify and work towards future goals and aspirations. It was evident from reviewing the person’s care records, including their care journey how well the person was doing in their current placement and the progression and achievements they had made.

The management team had identified future end of life care wishes needed to be discussed and planned with the person and this work had started.