Shottendane Nursing Home

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 75 (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.

One person told us, “My needs are met. The carers understand my needs. They give me my medications at the specific times because it is important I take them at those times.” A relative commented, “Loved one’s appearance is very good. They are cared for in bed because of their condition, but they take care of everything they need and are made comfortable. Their care is personalised to their needs, it is satisfactory.”

Each person had a care plan which detailed information about their background, history, social, physical and mental health needs. Care plans provided information for staff on how to meet people’s individual needs including how to support people to maintain their physical health and well-being, personal hygiene, oral and dental care. Staff had completed training in dementia and person-centred care. One staff told us, “We know about the residents’ needs by reading the care plans and we discuss in handover. If anything has changed, we document it and flag it up with the nurses.”

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 collaborated with healthcare professionals to create tailored care plans and ensure people’s needs were met. Daily notes reflected staff’s understanding of individual needs and preferences, and their support aligned accordingly.

One relative mentioned, “The best thing here is that loved one is getting proper attention. Everything is provided in accordance with his care plan. If there are any issues, I mention it to the staff and they sort it.” Another relative said, “Loved one can be confused but they are familiar with the carers because they see the same faces.”

We received mixed responses about the level of activities in the home. One relative said, “Loved one who has dementia, does not have any interesting things(activity) to do.” Another relative mentioned, “There are activities going on in the home but [loved one] does not enjoy participating in activities and occasionally sits in the lounge. They actually dislike having too much company.” A third relative said, “Loved one is cared for in bed. They play music and put on their TV. Staff come and chat with them and they like that.”

On both days of our visits there were activities in place in small groups and one-to-one in people’s rooms. We observed group activities in the communal area where people, their visitors and staff joined in. People were interested and participated well. The atmosphere was cheerful and upbeat. We also observed staff supporting people with exercise. We saw posters of various upcoming events including Christmas carols concerts, fayres and a Christmas party for people and staff.We also reviewed records showing various activities and events held within the service to promote engagement, social inclusion, and wellbeing for people.

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

People’s communication needs were identified through the care planning process. These included considerations relating to hearing, vision, and speech, as well as individual preferences for how information should be presented and shared. Key information, such as safeguarding and complaints procedures, was available in an easy-read format, and menus were provided in pictorial form. For individuals who did not speak English, staff who could communicate in the person’s preferred language were allocated. Care plans also contained guidance to support effective communication.

The registered manager and director confirmed that, where required, information could be made available in alternative languages and formats.

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. One relative told us, “I have not had to make a proper complaint to the management team. Petty things have been quickly sorted.” Another relative stated that, “I have had to bring up some issues, and they are now trying to address them.”

The provider had a complaint procedure which they followed in addressing concerns and they learnt from complaints made and used them to improve the quality of the service. For example, the cleanliness of the home had improved. People and their relatives also had access to the registered manager and deputy manager if they wished to discuss concerns or provide feedback about minor issues or informal matters.

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

Care plans contained information about each individual’s social background, religious beliefs, cultural identity, gender, sexuality, and any disabilities, ensuring that support was tailored to their specific needs. They clearly outlined any required adjustments, including how to meet cultural and religious preferences. For those who wished to participate in religious practices, staff arranged for services to be held within the home.

Staff had completed training in equality and diversity. They reported that they provided care and treatment based on each person’s individual needs and treated people as individuals.

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.

People and their relatives confirmed they were involved in their loved one’s care, and their views were listened to. One relative told us, “I’m here most days and they tell me how loved one is doing and if there are any concerns they talk to me about it.” However, people and their relatives told us that relative’s meetings were not regular. All the relatives we spoke with told us they have not had a meeting recently where they could meet and share their views about the service. The registered manager told us they had scheduled a meeting, and they shared the agenda with us which included subjects pertaining to the running of the service. While formal relatives’ meetings were being reintroduced, relatives continued to be actively involved through ongoing communication and individual engagement.

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 advanced care plans outlining their end-of-life wishes and Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) status, and staff were aware of these plans. Staff had completed training in end-of-life care, and staff told us they liaised with palliative care teams to support this. The registered manager told us they worked closely with individuals, their families, and professionals to ensure people’s needs were met. They also offered emotional support to families and made sure people’s lives were honoured and celebrated.