The Garth Care Home with Nursing

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 inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 had a good understanding of people’s preferences and what mattered most to them. The care plans we reviewed reflected individuals’ wishes and promoted independence, choice and control.
One relative told us, “We have been involved in their care plan. They also try and involve them (person) where possible. The staff do encourage (person’s name) to be independent.”
People received care and support that was centred around their individual needs, preferences and life histories. Staff knew people well and used this knowledge to provide personalised support that promoted dignity, wellbeing and positive outcomes. We regularly saw positive interactions between staff and people, and it was clear to see staff knew people well. People were encouraged to make choices about their daily lives and were supported to maintain as much independence as possible.
Person-centred care plans provided clear guidance for staff and were reviewed regularly with people and those important to them, where appropriate. Individual preferences relating to routines, activities and support needs were reflected throughout care records and day-to-day practice.
 

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 home ensured staff had the skills, knowledge and training required to meet people's individual needs. Staff understood people's physical and emotional health needs and worked in partnership with healthcare professionals to support joined-up care and timely access to specialist services when required.
People were supported by a stable and consistent staff team, which enabled staff to develop meaningful relationships and maintain a detailed understanding of their needs and preferences. This approach promoted continuity, reduced the risk of unmet needs and helped ensure care remained coordinated and effective over time.
One person told us, “Staff knows exactly what I like, and they know me very well, they know what I like”.
One relative told us, “Staff are much better than they used to be, and they understand (relative’s name) needs a lot better”.
 

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.
The home had some processes in place to support the Accessible Information Standard (AIS), helping to ensure people received information in ways that met their individual communication needs. Signage was displayed throughout the home to support orientation and accessibility, and a reception area noticeboard provided key information, including communication guidance and details of staff on duty each day.
Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people's individual communication needs and were able to describe how they adapted their approach to ensure information was shared in a way that people could understand and engage with.
The home had also introduced the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to create informational posters displayed throughout the service. These covered a range of topics, including available food and drink options, activities and other aspects of daily living. During our assessment, we discussed whether the format and volume of information presented on some posters was fully accessible for all people living in the home, particularly those who may find large amounts of written information difficult to process.
The management team was receptive to this feedback and demonstrated a willingness to review the materials to ensure information remained accessible, inclusive and tailored to the needs of the people using the service.
 

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 service had created formal opportunities for people and those important to them to share their views and contribute to the development of the service. Records showed that regular resident meetings were held, providing people with opportunities to discuss their experiences, raise suggestions and participate in decisions about life within the home.
Relatives were also encouraged to attend meetings and provide feedback on the care and support their family members received. This helped to ensure the views of people and their representatives were listened to, valued and used to inform ongoing improvements within the service.
One relative told us, “I have attended monthly residents’ meetings, and I receive newsletters and emails.”
 

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.
The home took reasonable steps to reduce barriers and promote equal access for people. The environment was accessible and included features such as handrails and adapted bathroom facilities to support people with varying levels of mobility and independence.
Individual care plans detailed any equipment, adaptations or assistance people required to access the home safely and participate in daily life. Staff understood these needs and supported people in a way that promoted inclusion and maximised independence.
Effective contingency plans were in place, including a business continuity plan and management on-call system, ensuring people continued to have access to the care and support they needed during emergencies or unexpected events. This helped to ensure fair and consistent access to services for everyone living in the home.
 

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 had completed Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) training, enabling them to recognise, respect and respond to people's diverse needs, backgrounds and protected characteristics. Systems and processes were in place to ensure care, treatment and support were delivered in a way that promoted equality, reduced potential barriers to access and participation, and upheld people's rights. This helped to ensure individuals received fair, inclusive and person-centred care, supporting equitable experiences and positive outcomes for all.
 

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.
Where required, people had ReSPECT (Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment) plans in place to support advance care planning and to ensure their preferences for emergency care and treatment were known and respected. The service worked collaboratively with the GP to review these plans regularly, helping to ensure they remained current, person-centred and reflective of individuals’ changing circumstances and future care wishes. One relative told us, “We have had conversations regarding DNR wishes, this was clear with (relative’s name). Conversations about not wanting to go to hospital, and funeral arrangements have been had”.