Alice House

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 remained 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.

Staff and managers were committed to providing support which was tailored to meet people’s individual choices and preferences. People and relatives were engaged in the process of care planning and reviewing their family members care plan. One relative told us, “I have been invited to review meetings. I was asked information about my dad’s life history.” Care plans were clear, robust, regularly reviewed, and tailored to each person’s needs and preferences. The registered manager encouraged the staff to learn something new about people and share with other staff. For example, the activities people enjoyed. Staff supported people in line with their routines, cultural or religious practices, and communication styles.

We spoke with staff, and they were knowledgeable about the people they supported. One staff told us the management team carried out spot checks and supervision of staff to help ensure they worked in a person-centred way. This included, checking that the records written were person centred.

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 were supported by a team of staff who coordinated their care and acted as the main point of contact for families, advocates, and external professionals. This helped ensure people’s needs were understood clearly, and information was shared promptly between everyone involved in their care.

Staff were allocated to different areas of the home, to ensure care was provided and people’s wellbeing was monitored. All care plans were electronic, and this enabled the staff to be print these off for hospital admissions and transfers. This helped to support people with continuity of care.

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

Throughout the inspection visit we observed evidence of information and support being provided in an accessible way for people. When supporting people with meals not only were they provided with a menu, but staff would also take a plate of food to show people their meal choices. The registered manager said the staff described clothing to people who had a visual impairment and asked them to feel clothing. Information was also given to people in printed format, with the print enlarged if needed. This included meeting minutes and newsletters.

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.

Policies and procedures were in place to manage and respond to complaints effectively. A log of complaints was maintained, which contained information about the nature of the complaint and how this had been responded to. People were unable to tell us how they would raise any complaints. Relatives felt able to speak to the registered manager about any issues or concerns and felt confident that matters raised would be addressed. One relative told us, “Communication used to be a problem, and it was difficult to speak up. If I have any concerns I feel comfortable speaking to the staff.”
 

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

When needed the staff contacted the relevant health professionals, to help them access the appropriate care. This included ensuring people had access to dentists, opticians or chiropodists, GP, and dementia wellbeing services. The staff supported people to attend appointments and helped to advocate when needed. One professional told us the staff were good at requesting referrals. They said, “The staff discuss the resident’s wellbeing with me and ask for support with referrals to outreach services.”

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.

All staff had been trained in equality and diversity and understood potential inequalities and worked to ensure these were not present at the home. Admission assessments helped the staff to find out about people’s past experiences and any inequality. The staff spoke with people and relatives to find out how best they could provide care and support. There was evidence to show staff had advocated for people to ensure they got the best care and support they could.

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.

The registered manager discussed people’s preferences about their end-of-life care with them or their relatives on admission to the home. This information was recorded in people’s care plans, so the staff were aware. There were records of any Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR). People were supported with end of life care by visiting health professionals, to ensure care would be tailored to individual wishes.

The staff supported people who were end of life care, by offering a private room where their families could sleep or rest. The registered manager told us; they recently welcomed relatives to stay who did not live local. This meant they could stay with their relative and receive regular updates from professionals. They were able to stay with their relative until they passed away, which helped to allow a dignified and person-centred death.