Chestnut Court & Beechwood Court (Care Outlook)

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. People’s care plans were recorded respectfully and in a person-centred way.

People told us they received person-centred care in line with their needs and preferences. A relative said, “[Family member] is in bed and can’t do anything. [They are] dependent. [They are] supported to attend the day centre twice a week. That’s organised by the social services to get out of the flat.”

The management team did all they could to work with people so they could meet their needs in line with their choices and wishes. For example, one person could easily become upset and anxious, leading to difficult relationships with the care staff. The registered manager told us, “So now [the person] has a small pool of carers who know [them] well, and this has made the relationship better. Communication has had to improve a lot, for example, visiting [them] in person when any changes have to be made.” The person’s relative confirmed a great improvement in the relationship.

People were supported to take part in in house activities organised by the housing department. People told us they enjoyed the activities on offer and their preferences were taken into consideration. A relative told us, “The staff encourage choices and encourage [family member] to join in lots of activities – but don’t force [them]. [They] joined in the choir and went to a summer barbecue a few weeks ago.”

Healthcare professionals who were regularly involved in people’s care thought people’s care was person-centred and people’s needs were met. A healthcare professional told us, “The environment is well organised and welcoming, and people appear comfortable and well looked after” and another said, “Overall, the service seems well managed and attentive to people’s needs.”

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 told us they received good care, and their healthcare needs were met and relatives echoed this.

People’s care plans described their healthcare needs and how to meet these. We saw these were detailed and personalised. For example, where a person was living with a chronic health condition, there were clear instructions for staff to follow, so they could anticipate the person becoming unwell and take appropriate action.

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

People’s communication needs were assessed during the pre-admission assessment so information could be made available to them in a format that suited them. People's care plans detailed their preferences and any aids they needed to support effective communication.

People and relatives told us communication was effective, and they were provided with all the information they needed. A person with significant visual impairment was supported to attend meetings with a specific group and was provided with aids to enable them to use the television more. The care workers were aware of the person’s needs and ensured they adapted their communication ways to meet the person’s needs. The person’s relative told us, “The carers stand nearby so that [person] is aware of their presence.”

There was effective communication between the management and the staff team. We saw numerous emails to provide information, advice, updates and recommendations. The management catered for staff who had communication needs. The provider has an accessibility policy so people could be provided with a document in a different language if this was necessary.

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 ensured people and relatives had the necessary information in relation to processes for sharing feedback or raising concerns. People and relatives told us, “No complaints. We’ve been here about two years. If we needed to complain we’d go to the head manager”, “I tried to raise awareness about the low level of staff at nighttime. No other complaints” and “I get on well with everybody. No complaints.”

People and relatives confirmed they were involved in the planning of their care and support. Care plans were reviewed regularly, and people were asked for their feedback about the care they received and anything they would like to change. People and relatives told us they felt able to raise any concerns or issues and had the opportunities to attend meetings.

Records showed complaints received were addressed in accordance with the provider’s policies and procedures. Any learning from complaints and concerns was shared with staff to inform their future practice.

People were able to voice their opinion of the service during reviews, meetings and yearly surveys. We saw the last survey carried out in July 25 showed people were happy with the service. One person had said, “I am lucky to live here. I have no complaints whatsoever. I am happy to call this my home.”

Where a concern was identified, the provider took appropriate action. They had put in place a ‘service user survey action plan’. The provider had identified that some people did not know who to contact if they had a complaint or concern. We saw the registered manager took appropriate action to ensure they had this information without delay. Another person had raised some concerns about the care staff. We saw this was investigated further and appropriate action was taken.

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

People told us they had access to the care and support they required and were happy with this. They felt their needs were met and the staff cared and supported them effectively. Records showed people were supported with transport when they attended appointments and a range of healthcare professionals visited the home regularly. Records of visits were included in people’s care plans and the staff ensured they followed instructions.

Care plans were regularly reviewed to identify any changes in a person’s care needs so the appropriate support could be found if needed. This included making appropriate referrals to external professionals as needed.

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's care and treatment promoted equality and protected people's rights. People told us they were consulted in relation to their cultural and spiritual needs.

Whilst most people did not have any spiritual needs there were fortnightly church led services at the schemes that they could attend, If they wished to.

The provider had an equality and diversity policy in place and created a welcoming and inclusive atmosphere for all people and staff, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. People were consulted in relation to their sexuality needs if they were comfortable discussing these.

People’s care plans indicated they had been consulted in decision making, including whether they preferred to receive care from a care worker of a specific gender. Their care plans reflected people’s physical, mental, emotional and social needs.

The registered manager liaised closely with commissioners in relation to what they wanted the service to provide for people, so that people’s needs would be met effectively.

People had the opportunity to discuss anything of interest during ‘residents’ meetings and individual conversations with the management team, such as activities, housekeeping, kitchen, care and maintenance.

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 end of life wishes were sought and recorded in their care plans, if they were comfortable discussing these. However, the registered manager told us most people were not prepared to discuss this during their initial assessment or during care reviews.

The service was not supporting anybody at end-of-life stage. However, the staff received training in this and the registered manager told us they would ensure they would have everything in place should they need to support someone in the last stages of their life.