Linnet Mews

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.

The provider ensured people were at the centre of their care and treatment, involving them in decisions about how to respond to any changes in their needs. People were supported to work in partnership with staff to develop and review their care plans, helping to ensure their views were reflected.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s individual preferences, routines and interests. They worked with people to plan activities that were meaningful to them. One person told us, “ I like to go out every day and the staff support me with that.” Another person told us how they were a member of the gym at their local leisure centre and staff supported them to attend.

The registered manager and staff team reviewed people’s progress and sought feedback from people, their representatives and the wider multi-disciplinary support team. This information was used to make appropriate adjustments to support, helping to ensure support remained responsive to people’s needs while promoting their independence and respecting their choices.

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 service worked effectively with external agencies and professionals to ensure people’s needs were met in a planned and timely manner. The service had built relationships with services in the local area to ensure people had opportunities be part of the local community, such as shops and leisure centres.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Support plans clearly outlined how individuals communicated and the specific support they needed. This information was reviewed and updated regularly to ensure it stayed accurate and relevant.

Staff had a strong understanding of each person’s communication needs, and they adapted their approach to help people fully engage, understand information, and express their views.

Important information including guidance on how to raise concerns and access advocacy services were available to people. This approach ensured everyone had equal access to key information, enabling them to speak up, make informed choices, and maintain control over their care.

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 had opportunities to share feedback about the service. There was information throughout the building in accessible formats that met the needs of the people living there. On entering the building there was accessible cards for people to write to give their feedback, for either compliments or concerns. They were able to post these anonymously to our team at Head Office so that any changes could be made where needed.

Information was tailored to ensure it was understandable to the people being supported. For example, menus, health and safety related posters and other accessible posters informing people of the whistle blowing procedure, advocacy and safeguarding.

People were provided with accessible information when first transitioned into the service, this helped people to understand what the service could support with, what the service provision was all about, introductions to the team, and an overview of the location where they were living.

There was also accessible information through the building from Headway, the brain injury association which rotated monthly and provided people with insight into their injury and how this can impact them as well as their family and friends.

Each person had a named keyworker who met with them regularly to review and update their support plan and discuss any concerns or experiences they wished to share. This ensured people had a trusted point of contact who understood them well and supported them to remain at the centre of decisions about their support.

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

The service had robust arrangements in place to ensure people could regularly access healthcare professionals. Staff were proactive in supporting people, including advocating on behalf of people when assistance was needed to communicate their needs. Staff displayed a strong awareness of equality and diversity, recognising the barriers some individuals may face when accessing healthcare services. They took practical and effective steps to address these challenges, ensuring that everyone had fair and equal access to the care they required. This reflects the provider’s commitment to equitable access, ensuring that no one was disadvantaged due to their personal needs or circumstances.

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 rights were upheld, with support delivered in a person-centred manner that respected each person’s identity, differences, and choices. Support plans included detailed information about what was important to each person, such as key relationships, preferred routines, and health needs. The service worked closely with people to ensure these needs were understood and reflected in day-to-day practice by staff. The service also actively promoted the use of advocacy services. Advocates supported people to understand their rights and make informed decisions about their care, ensuring they had an independent voice and were empowered to express their wishes, particularly when they experienced barriers in doing so.

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.

Support plans clearly set out the goals people wished to achieve and how staff should support them to work towards these. None of the people using the service had an advanced plan in place at the time of review. However, it was clearly recorded that the opportunity to discuss and implement an advanced plan had been made available, should they wish to do so in the future.