The Elms

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 deliver.

This service scored 71 (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.

Feedback consistently confirmed people felt well supported. One person said, “The staff know more about our problems and what we can and can’t do.” The same person went on to say, “They know me well. They’re excellent.” Another person told us, “I’ve been here [time], and I feel quite happy.”A relative said, “I can honestly say the staff know my relative very well. The staff meet my relative’s needs.”

A visiting professional told us, “There’s always an activity coordinator. A person was quite distressed, an activity coordinator went over to them, doing colouring and activities and calmed them down.” Another professional said, “They [staff] know people very well, yes. They [staff] know who to have a laugh with, appropriately.”

A staff member said, “This is what care should be, residents get what they want. Its person-centred. Things get done, and it is actioned.”

Care plans were tailored to people’s individual 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.

A relative told us, “I had input when they did my relative’s care plans.’’

A visiting professional said, “They [staff] know their residents. I don’t know the carers well, which kind of makes sense as I interact with team leads [senior carers], there is that continuity.” They went on to say, “There are no major red flags. I think the 2 team leads [senior carers] are good, they know people and know what they are talking about.”

A staff member said, “We are a stable team, so the residents always have the same staff.”The registered manager said, “We ensure care plans and risk assessments are up to date to ensure we monitor changes to resident’s needs. We involve other professionals and family members with care planning.”

People had access to a range of health professionals. The provider worked to move people to alternative services, or for people to return home, so people had the most appropriate support in place and continuity of care.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information. However, this was not always in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

One person’s care plan referred to them using communication tools to support them to communicate. However, we did not see these being used and we observed staff only verbally interacted with the person. When we asked about this, we were told the person used more objects of reference than a specific tool. This meant the person’s plan had not been reviewed and updated to ensure staff had the most up to date guidance about how to support the person, which could lead to inconsistent care.

Despite this, the registered manager understood their responsibility to ensure people were supported to access and understand information about their care. They said, “This is to make sure all residents have information given to them in a way that can be understood. For example, larger print or a different language.”

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.

A person told us, “I’d go to the manager [if I needed to complain].” Another person said to us, “I don’t know [who I would raise an issue with] as I don’t have any issues!”One relative said, “The staff never fail to call me. The communication is great.” They went on to say, “I am fully aware of how to complain. But I have not needed to.”

The registered manager explained how they dealt with complaints, they said, “We have a complaints procedure that we follow. I will always make contact to the person making the complaint and then follow up to make sure the complainant is satisfied and to see if any lessons learned are needed.”

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 other health professionals.

A relative told us, “I am kept up to date with any hospital appointments and things.’’ They went on to say, “Staff support with all appointments, they are very helpful.’’

A staff member told us, “I know the residents very well. If I thought there was a change to their health, I would notice this. If a resident has a change to their health, we would ask the GP to see them.”

There was on call system for staff to use in the event there was an emergency, or they were not sure what to do. The registered manager told us, “We have an on-call system in place. Staff know to contact management if they need to.”

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.

A relative said, “I have no concerns about discrimination; it is a homely and happy environment.”

People had access to hobbies and activities of their choice, tailored to their needs. People’s care was personalised and enabled them to move on from the service, where this was suitable.

Staff voiced they felt supported and treated fairly at work, too.

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.

A relative told us, “The home kept me up to date with my relative’s care and end of life care.’’ The same relative went on to say, “Staff made sure everything was in place to support my relative having a perfect end of life. The staff sat me down and explained the process of end of life and what to expect.”

A visiting professional said, “[A person who passed away earlier in 2025] died a peaceful death, staff get a local hospice involved.”

A staff member told us, “We have got a good rapport with district nurses and local hospice nurses.” Another staff member said, “We can have care plans in place for end of life. It is about making sure residents have a peaceful and respected end of life. For example, a resident might need end of life medication or a ReSPECT form in place." ReSPECT stands for Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment.

The registered manager explained, “We make sure an end of life [care] plan is in place. We also involve family members and other professionals to make sure the residents receive the best end of life care, and their last wishes are met.”

We saw end of life care plans were in place for people, where it had been appropriate to discuss this.