Thorn Springs

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 time we have inspected this key question since the service registered with us. At this inspection, we have rated this key question good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (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 and the management team knew people well and knew how they wanted to be supported. They made changes to people’s support if their preferences changed. People’s care plans were individualised and detailed how people wanted to be supported in line with their individual support needs. Staff spoke with people about preferred topics and organised social events based on what they knew people liked. One person said, ‘‘We all love all the staff here and I have asked for [preferred gender] of staff for personal care, and this is always respected.’’ A relative told us, ‘‘[Family member] follows [religion] and really likes music and the staff know this. Even when they don’t feel like coming out of their room to join in the staff make sure the event comes to them for a time. It means the world to [family member].’’

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. Staff understood and respected people’s cultural support needs, in relation to the food they chose to eat and the religious practices they wished to follow. Care plans clearly stated how staff were to support people in relation to these support needs and preferences. The staff team was consistent, and the registered manager had recruited additional staff to cover for annual leave and sickness so unfamiliar staff supported people only on rare occasions. Staff made efforts to include people in outings to the local community if they chose to do this. One person said, ‘‘I know all the staff by name. We go out and about to lots of places like garden centres and museums.’’ A relative told us ‘‘The care and attention [family member] has is really very good. The staff all know him well which helps, and they know he liked the sun so always make sure he goes to the garden on sunny days for example.’’

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Whist, forms of communication such as pictures and objects were available to support people we did not see these used consistently by the staff team. For example, at mealtimes physical ‘show plates’ and pictures were available to help people understand their choices, however these were not used each mealtime. One person was visibly confused by the meal they were served and may have benefitted from these alternative communication methods. There was limited evidence of easy read documents such as people’s care plans being made available in accessible formats. The registered manager and management team were aware this was an area that still needed some improvement and showed us evidence these improvements would be considered and made in the near future.

We observed staff speaking with people in a slow and relaxed manner to help make sure people understood what was being communicated with them. People and relatives were invited to meetings to discuss what was happening at the service so information could be shared with them. Staff and the management team had daily meetings to discuss how people’s support needs may have changed or any other information they needed to know. One relative said, ‘‘We are asked to go to meetings but if we can’t go, we see the minutes and when we visit, we can always ask for updates.’’

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 fed back about the service in regular meetings. If they chose not to attend meetings then they were able to speak with the management or staff team on a one-to-one basis. Staff also spoke with people throughout the day whilst supporting them. People and their relatives had opportunities to discuss care plans and risk assessments. One person said, ‘‘I can chat with the staff if I need anything.’’ A relative told us, ‘‘I feel the [registered manager] and staff team do listen to what we have to say. We have oversight of [family members] care plan and are asked for our opinions on this as well.’’

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support, and treatment they needed when they needed it. People had access to equipment the needed to be mobile and to move around the service and these were checked regularly. Staff supported people to contact health professionals such as GP’s or speech and language therapists if necessary and supported them to attend appointments with these professionals. Professionals were positive about how the staff team worked with them to support people. One professional said, ‘‘I always enjoy visiting Thorn Springs and value the way the staff listen to and work with us.’’

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. We observed people enjoying the social pastimes on offer such as arts and crafts, baking and playing games with the staff team. Staff dedicated to creating social opportunities and engagement for people had made efforts to speak with people about their interests and how they liked to spend their time. They then made sure they included these interests in any social interactions that were offered to people. We saw people really enjoying planned social events such as singers and entertainers. People also told us they enjoyed accessing the community when these opportunities were offered to them. One person said, ‘‘There is always something going on here and if we don’t want to go then we don’t have to.’’ A relative told us, ‘‘I am always impressed with the entertainment that [family member] has at the service. It really makes them smile especially the entertainers who sing the old songs.’’

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 lives. People’s care plans contained detailed information about how people would like to be supported at the end of their life. Staff had a good understanding of how to support people with dignity and respect at this time and who to contact for further help if needed. Relatives told us they were happy their family members were living at the service at this time as they were assured staff gave them the best care possible.