Greystoke Manor

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 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 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.

We observed people received personalised care from staff who knew their likes, dislikes and preferences. One person said, “It’s the friendliness of staff that really matters. That’s what’s important. Staff are kind and happy. That’s important because when you’re very old, you haven’t got much to look forward to.” When a person became upset in their bedroom during lunch, the staff member with them comforted them by singing. This had an immediate impact for the person who stopped crying and engaged with the singing. It was clear this staff member knew the person very well.

A staff member defined person-centred care and said, “For me it’s where the residents choose their care. If they don’t want to get up and get dressed, they don’t have to, it’s their choice.”

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 had access to a range of health and social care professionals, and received co-ordinated care and support. One person told us, “I have access to doctors and people like that. We get to see them when we need them.”

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

There was some signage around the home. Bedrooms were named after famous artists, musicians and towns. We saw people knew their way around the home, where their bedrooms were and communal areas such as the lounge and dining room. Each person had a communication care plan which provided information and guidance for staff on people’s preferred communication method. We observed 1 person having their lunchtime meal. They lived with sight loss so staff explained to them what the meal consisted of, and explained where each item of food was placed on the plate. Where people had difficulty with verbal communication, staff could read their body language. For example, when 1 person struggled to speak coherently, they would point or gesticulate, and staff understood what they were trying to communicate.

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.

We asked people if they knew how to make a complaint and, if so, whether they would feel listened to? One person said, “I would complain to the office, but I don’t know if it goes anywhere.” Another person told us, “I haven’t had to make a complaint, but if I thought anything was out of order, I’d be there.” A relative commented, “I would go to [registered manager] or [administrator] with any complaints. Generally, they look after people very well.” A staff member told us any concerns people raised would also be shared at daily handover meetings. The provider had a complaints policy which was shared with people and their relatives.

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

Greystoke Manor provided a safe, accessible environment for people, including activities to engage them. The home is located in a quiet, rural setting with easy access to the local church and GP surgery.

People’s care and support were accessible, timely and in line with legal requirements. Information about people within electronic care plans enabled staff to understand people’s diverse needs, which were catered for. People had access to a range of healthcare professionals and support from external agencies as needed.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care and support in response to this.

The provider recognised people’s different needs and ensured care and support were tailored to meet them. Greystoke Manor supported people with a variety of needs, including people living with dementia and sensory impairments. The layout of the home, alongside staff skills and experience, supported people to receive care that met their individual 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.

People were supported by staff and healthcare professionals to make decisions about their future plans and end of life wishes. A relative complimented staff about their loved one’s end of life care and said, “At my father’s point of passing, I can’t fault it. I have some lovely memories.”

Care plans documented people’s choices and planning for the future. Some people had Recommended Summary Plans for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT). These focused on people’s individual needs and preferences and included advice in an emergency situation where a person may be unable to communicate, such as during cardiac arrest. Plans included whether people wanted to stay at the home as they reached the end of their lives or be admitted to hospital for palliative care.