Hardwick Dene

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 good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.

This service scored 61 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People's care was not always planned or delivered in a way that reflected their individual preferences, interests and life experiences. Although the provider offered a programme of activities, we found some activities and resources were not always tailored to people's individual interests and preferences.

A healthcare professional told us people spent most of their day in the communal lounge and had limited opportunities to engage in meaningful activities outside of this area. This reflected our observations during the inspection. We also observed people routinely using plastic plates and bowls during mealtimes, which did not promote a normal, age-appropriate dining experience. This reduced assurance that people's individuality and quality of everyday life were consistently considered when planning and delivering care.

There were significant shortfalls in how the provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was not joined-up, flexible or supportive of choice and continuity.

People's healthcare needs were not always supported through effective partnership working with healthcare professionals. We found examples where appropriate specialist advice had not been sought to support the management of people's healthcare needs. As a result, staff did not always have clear, up-to-date guidance to support people safely and consistently.

This reduced assurance that people's healthcare needs were consistently reviewed and supported through effective partnership working.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Information used to support people's care was not always accurate or reliable. The provider had accessible information available, including easy-read information and details of advocacy services. However, care records were not always accurate or up to date. We found examples where records documented care and support that had not taken place. This reduced assurance that information used to plan, deliver and review people's care consistently reflected their needs and the care they had received.

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 and their relatives were encouraged to share their views about the service. Relatives told us they felt able to speak with staff and managers if they had concerns and described communication with the service as positive. Several relatives told us they felt involved in discussions about their family member's care.

The provider had systems in place to gather feedback from people and those important to them. This included regular discussions with people and ongoing communication with relatives to help ensure views and experiences were considered when planning and reviewing care.

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

People were able to access the care, support and treatment they needed. Relatives told us people were supported to attend healthcare appointments and access specialist services when required. Staff worked with healthcare professionals to help ensure people received appropriate care and treatment.

The service environment and support arrangements enabled people with different health and mobility needs to access care and support.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care,supportand treatment in response to this.

People received care and support that promoted equality and respected their individual needs. Staffdemonstratedan understanding of people's individual needs and preferences and supported people respectfully. People were treated fairly and with dignity, regardless of their individual circumstances or protected characteristics.

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's wishes and preferences for future care had been considered and documented where appropriate. Records included information about people's end of life care preferences and decisions relating to future care and treatment. Staff were aware of people's wishes and knew how to access this information when needed. This helped to ensure people's preferences could be respected if their needs changed.