Fosse Healthcare - St Mary's House

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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as 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.

Communication between the service and people’s relatives was consistently positive. One person told us, “There is good communication between me and the staff. They keep me updated on things like GP appointments and staff changes or if there are any problems in seeing me on time.”

Care plans reflected people’s individual needs, preferences, and protected characteristics. Records showed people’s cultural, religious, and spiritual needs were considered and documented.

Records and feedback identified people’s care was reviewed regularly and people and their relatives were actively involved in the process. Copies of care plans were available in people’s homes, supporting transparency and shared decision-making. One person told us, “They review my care and have conversations with me when they are any changes before my review. The changes we make are always done."

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.

The service was responsive, reliable and flexible in meeting people’s individual preferences and needs, including requests for care to be provided by staff of a specific gender. Managers worked proactively to accommodate these requests wherever possible, helping to ensure continuity, consistency and a personalised approach to care delivery. This contributed to people feeling comfortable, respected and supported by staff who understood their individual circumstances.

The provider ensured people and their relatives received appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats tailored to their individual communication needs. The service was meeting the requirements of the Accessible Information Standard (AIS), ensuring people could access and understand information.

People and their relatives were provided with key information at the commencement of the service, including a service user guide, terms and conditions, and contact details for the provider. Information was made available in formats reflecting people's assessed communication needs and preferences.

Records were maintained securely and confidentially in line with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Act helping to protect people's privacy and personal information.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people's communication needs and preferences. They described a range of communication methods used to support people effectively, including communicating in people's preferred language. This helped to ensure people could express their views, wishes and choices and were involved in decisions about their care.

Care records confirmed people's communication needs were assessed at the point of referral and reviewed regularly as part of ongoing care reviews. Care plans contained personalised information about how best to communicate with individuals, enabling staff to provide responsive, person-centred support and reduce the risk of communication barriers affecting people's care and wellbeing.

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

Whilst formal reviews were undertaken with people and those important to them, managers routinely sought informal feedback to gain assurance about the quality of care and support being provided. This was corroborated by relatives we spoke with, who described managers as visible, approachable and responsive.

Feedback from people and their relatives was consistently positive. Of all the feedback received during the assessment, no concerns or complaints were raised.

Comprehensive and contemporaneous records were maintained, providing an accurate account of people’s care and support and enabling effective oversight of care delivery. Staff regularly monitored and reviewed people’s wellbeing, continually assessing their needs to ensure any changes in presentation or circumstances were promptly identified, appropriately responded to, and reflected in care records and plans where required. This supported the delivery of safe, responsive and person-centred care.

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

No concerns relating to people’s ability to access the service were found.

The building was accessible and suitable for people, and this was considered at the assessment stage. An internal lift for people with reduced mobility was in situ. Communal areas were spacious, hard floored and free from potential hazards and risks.

There was no evidence to suggest anyone was disadvantaged or unable to receive support in a timely or consistent way. People received care in line with their assessed needs. Managers arranged care provision in a structured way to ensure staff could deliver care reliably and as planned. This meant people experienced equitable access to the service.

There were no concerns identified regarding how people experienced the service. People were treated as individuals and were supported in a fair and equitable way, regardless of their personal characteristics, background, lifestyle, culture, or support needs. This helped to ensure people received consistent opportunities, respect, and access to support, resulting in equitable outcomes and experiences.

The provider had an Equality, Diversity and Human Rights Policy which set out expectations for recognising and respecting people's protected characteristics, promoting equal opportunities, and preventing discrimination. The policy provided guidance to staff on identifying and addressing potential inequalities.

People and their relatives were offered support to plan for significant life changes, enabling them to consider their future wishes and make informed decisions about their care and support, including end-of-life care where appropriate.

Opportunities to discuss future planning were incorporated into assessments and regular care reviews. The registered manager said, “End of life wishes are incorporated into the individual’s care plan and discussed throughout the care planning and review process. Consideration is given to Power of Attorney (POA), advance wishes and preferences, with involvement from District Nurses and other relevant healthcare professionals where palliative or end-of-life care is required.”