Addison Court

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

The provider was previously in breach of legal regulation in relation to managing complaints. Improvements were found at this assessment and the provider was no longer in breach of regulation.

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 were personalised and regularly reviewed to ensure they responded to any changes in people’s choices or needs. One person said staff, “couldn’t do better.” Staff knew people’s support needs well, and any changes in these were effectively communicated. One member of staff told us, “I have had time to review policies, look at [care plans] and get to know residents and staff.” People had access to a range of personalised activities. These were promoted in a newsletter that was sent to people and relatives to keep them informed of what was happening at the service.

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. One external professional told us they found, “good evidence of appropriate and timely referrals” from the service.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. During our visit we saw staff effectively communicating with people and supporting them to express themselves. For example, where people were hard of hearing staff ensured they stood directly in front of the person and spoke slowly so the person could follow what they were saying.

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. People and relatives could attend meetings with staff and discuss how the service was run, with feedback being encouraged and acted on. One relative told us, “They don't do the meetings to look good. It really is chance to talk about things, so they know what people want.” Complaints processes were in place, and people and relatives told us they knew how to raise any concerns they had.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People and relatives did not raise any concerns about their access to care and support.

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. For example, staff had worked hard to help one person develop and increase their mobility. This had led to improvements in several other areas of their health and had greatly improved their wellbeing.

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. Care plans contained information on people’s decisions, which were discussed with them and their relatives.