Cocklebury Farmhouse

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.

This service scored 79 (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 and their relatives had been involved in planning the support they needed. People showed us their support plans and said they had meetings with staff to plan what they wanted to do. Plans set out people’s specific wishes, for example, the ways people liked to be supported, people’s preferences about activities they took part in and how their specific health and communication needs should be met. However, we identified that people’s needs in relation to their sexuality was not reflected in the support plans we sampled. The registered manager told us they had completed some work with 1 person, but this had not been updated in their support plan. The registered manager had also made contacts with specialists to assist with this support and further work was planned.

People were supported to take part in a mixture of group and individual activities, depending on their wishes. One person told us they had been supported to plan holidays with a small group of friends, rather than a larger group which they had previously found difficult. Another person told us they had recently started to coach at their rugby club and said they were “really enjoying the challenge”. Relatives told us they were happy with the service people received, which met their specific needs. Staff said the service was focused on meeting people’s specific needs, to help them develop skills and independence. This approach was reflected in the records of support provided.

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 provider worked in partnership with other agencies, to ensure people received continuity of care. Professionals told us staff discussed any concerns with them to resolve issues, with a health professional telling us staff were “knowledgeable regarding [people’s] needs and have advocated actively regarding requesting assessments and results.”Professionals said staff took a person-centred approach, to support people to make their own decisions. One professional said, “When discussing and planning residents’ needs it was clear that the Cocklebury team always went the extra mile to find local resources which might be of benefit to the people living in their homes.” Details of this support was recorded in people’s care records.

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

At the last inspection we found that information was not always provided to people in formats which were accessible for them. At this inspection we found this had improved. People’s communication needs had been assessed, and a communication support plan had been developed with each person. Documents had been provided in more accessible formats for people, including the use of symbols, photographs and pictures. This included information on how to make a complaint, contact details for anyone who doesn’t feel safe and support plans. Feedback from professionals included, “The management team is creative in ensuring all information is presented in an accessible format using images and photographs for all people they support. Meetings are conducted to ensure every voice and opinion is acknowledged.” During the inspection we observed staff using these communication methods with people.

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.

The provider had a complaints procedure, and accessible versions had been developed for each person. There were systems to track all concerns and complaints that had been raised to ensure they had been followed up and action taken. Records demonstrated all concerns had been investigated and actions taken to resolve issues. People and relatives told us staff listened to them and took action to resolve any issues. Regular meetings were held with people to obtain feedback and to report on action that had been taken as a result.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Assessments included the support people required to access the care they needed, including any specific equipment or adaptations. The assessments were regularly reviewed and updated as people’s needs changed. The provider had made adaptations to the building, fitting a stair lift in response to a person’s changing mobility needs. This enabled the person to stay in the bedroom they had used for many years. The provider had worked with the occupational therapy team to ensure equipment was suitable for people and enabled them to be supported safely.

Staff and leaders were innovative in how they listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. Staff and leaders actively used this information to provide exceptionally tailored care, support and treatment in response to this. People’s needs were reviewed regularly to ensure they were being supported in the least restrictive way possible which still met their needs. Staff had worked with health and social care professionals to reduce restrictions for people, for example reducing psychotropic medicines. People were supported to access local community services and healthcare by staff when needed. Staff had completed equality and diversity training and had a good understanding of the discrimination people may experience.

The provider had supported people to overcome barriers and enabled them to vote in elections. Staff developed a 6-week process to give people an overview of the election, enable group and one to one discussion, provide details of the candidates and their manifestos and invited the candidates to attend the service so people could meet them. Information was made accessible for people by translation into formats that met their communication needs. The provider worked in partnership with election officials to ensure people's sensory needs were met and they were able to access polling stations. As a result of the support, 8 of the 10 people living at Cocklebury Farmhouse voted in the general election.

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 had been supported to set goals for the future and plan out the support they needed to achieve those goals. The service was not providing any end-of-life care. Staff were aware of people’s wishes for the future, including information about what people would like to happen at their funeral.