Richmond Village Coventry DCA

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 68 (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.

People received support that was appropriate to their individual needs by staff who knew them well. This included help and support with health conditions. One told us, “A dietician comes to see me.” Another said, “There is a ‘Wellness Clinic’ that I can go to where they check your blood pressure, weight, etc.”

Staff understood the importance of person-centred care to ensure people’s needs were met how they wished. One staff member said, “Each resident is important. We do the care call how they want it done. It’s all about their needs and their choices. Everyone has different needs and different things they like or don’t like.”

Relatives confirmed that staff were quick to pick up on changes to their family member’s health and to act upon this. One relative told us, “[Person’s] needs have escalated and they (staff) have been very flexible. The manager is always available. Carers will contact me if [person] needs anything.”

Care plans were person centred and focused on people’s healthcare needs as well as support that promoted their wellbeing.

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 received continuity of care by a stable staff team which meant they got to know everyone, and everyone got to know them.

People’s needs were assessed when they started to use the service to ensure their needs could be met. People were able to come together for activities provided by the service if they wished which helped them to get to know others and become integrated with their local community. Activities provided included entertainment from singers, visits from school children and gentle exercise. Outside trips to local areas also took place.

The registered manager worked with other health and social care professionals when needed to ensure people received the support they needed. A staff member told us how they had a positive relationship with the district nurses. This meant, with people’s permission, they could access any advice to ensure people received the care they needed.

The provider supplied some information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Care records were regularly reviewed to ensure they were up-to-date and accurate. However, it was not clear how information was made accessible to those with dementia. Also, the complaints procedure directed people to go to reception to ask who the Village Manager was when some people would not have been able to do this. The registered manager acknowledged the importance of clear communication and providing information that people understood. They told us they would review information accessibility.

People’s communication needs were considered at the point of their initial assessment. They told us that information could be provided in alternative formats if required. This included picture format, braille or large print to support people’s needs. People had access to newsletters and leaflets telling them about activities planned during each month.

Relatives told us there usually good communication between them and the service. One relative told us, “They phone me. For example, if [Person] has been ill or if the paramedics have been called. They keep me informed. They email me if less urgent.”

The provider gave people opportunities to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Information related to some of these processes was not always clear. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

People were issued with a welcome pack when they started to use the service, this included information about who to contact in an emergency and how to do this. The pack included names, photos and contact details of management staff at the service. The complaints procedure in the pack did not make clear all the options people had to raise a complaint. The registered manager subsequently provided a copy of a complaints leaflet detailing alternative options. However, this did not contain contact names or telephone numbers for all contacts listed to enable this to be fully accessible to people. The registered manager told us this information would be reviewed.

laints had been raised, it was not clear if these related to people who received a personal care service. This was important as we only review the service in respect of those people who receive the regulated activity of personal care. We saw complaints received had been acted upon in a timely manner and appropriately responded to.

People felt listened to and said staff respected their wishes. Comments included, “They listen and help me understand any issues” and “Carers listen as I am always asking questions and they always answer me.” People had the opportunity to attend resident meetings where they could hear about changes planned at the service and any issues that may impact on them. People were given opportunities to discuss any areas of improvement they felt were needed.

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

People felt supported to access the care and support they needed. For example, where people wished to go to the dining area in the main building but were not able to do this independently, options were available to them. This included staff support or a tray service where people could have food to be brought to them for a fee. Where people needed to access a health professional such as a doctor or district nurse, staff were able to support people to ensure this was arranged. One staff member told us, “If a resident asks us to call the doctor or the hospital, we can do that for them.” Another stated, “All the residents have an emergency pendant so if they need us, they press it and we go right away. If they needed an ambulance, we would call and stay with them until it arrived. There is a staff member here all day and all night, so help is always at hand.”

Staff were mindful of those people who may need assistance to attend social activities and assistance was available for people to be supported with wheelchairs.

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.

Staff knew people well and ensured care provided was tailored to their individual needs.

People and their relatives described positive experiences and felt confident their views and opinions were listened to. Where a need was identified through feedback, appropriate action was taken to support people.

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.

We saw there were options for people to contribute to an advanced care plan should their health seriously deteriorate resulting in them needing end of life care. Do Not Attempt Resuscitation (DNAR) forms were in place for some people. Where people had chosen to share information about their end of life care, it was recorded in their care plan. This was so staff could ensure people were supported how they wished. Family members were also involved in these decisions where appropriate.