Templeton Place Care 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 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.

Staff understood what person-centred care meant. One staff member said, “It’s about caring for the individual’s needs because no 2 people are the same.” The clinical lead told us, “The care here is definitely person-centred. We believe everyone is an individual and we think out of the box. Person centredness is not just a word here; it really makes a difference. It's hard work at first, but it’s worth it when you get it right.” They told us when new staff joined the service, they went through care plans to demonstrate just how important person-centred care was.

People and their families told us they felt staff knew them and their choices and preferences. Care plans we looked at included this detail, and records showed plans were regularly reviewed. People and their relatives told us they were included in reviews. One person’s relative said, “The staff really know my [relative]. They know all about [relative], like what [they] want to eat, what time [they] like to get up.”

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’s diverse needs and wishes were recorded within care plans. People’s relatives told us their loved ones received support which promoted their individual backgrounds and cultures, such as attending the local church or temple. The chef told us how they liaised with people’s families to meet people’s cultural dietary needs.

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

People’s communication needs were assessed. Plans informed staff of any technology people used to keep in touch with friends and family. For example, 1 person’s plan had guidance for staff to ensure their device was charged overnight.

Information about the service was available to people. For example, information, such as the complaints policy, and information about activities and meetings were displayed in the main foyer area of the building.

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.

There were processes to investigate complaints and concerns. Complaints and concerns were recorded and investigated, and records showed these were resolved appropriately.

Everyone we spoke with told us they knew how to raise a concern or a compliment. One person said, “If I’m not happy with something, I would talk to the person who runs [the service] but I have no cause to complain about anything.” One person’s relative said, “Any concerns I have, I talk to them, and they are immediately addressed.” Regular resident and relatives’ meetings took place, and we saw the minutes of these. There was a ‘suggestions’ box in the reception area.

The provider had systems to support feedback from people and relatives and respond appropriately. The management team told us they used information from the visitors signing in system to follow up on any feedback, and the provider sent emails to randomly selected relatives 4 times a year to seek additional feedback. The registered manager said, “I welcome feedback, positive and negative. I’d rather know and have the opportunity to put things right before things snowball.” We saw several examples of positive feedback received.

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

People with protected characteristics were supported to have equitable access to services. For example, people with a disability which impacted their ability to leave the home were supported to access health services to meet their individual needs.

Staff made sure people continued to have access to routine healthcare appointments regardless of people’s mobility requirements. For example, health professionals such as dentists and opticians visited the service to carry out regular check-ups. One person’s relative said, “My relative had toothache, and the care staff helped me to find an emergency dentist at 9.30pm.”

The registered manager told us how they had supported 1 person who was struggling to settle into the service. The person had a love of languages and so the registered manager identified staff members who spoke different languages to spend time with the person. This helped the person to relax and settle into the service.

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.

Records showed staff received training in equity, diversity and human rights to help them understand equality and address discrimination.

People were not always 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.

Although people had care plans for the provision of end-of-life care, all of the plans lacked detail and information. We fed this back to the management team who told us this was an area they were looking at. Further training was booked for staff to understand how to discuss this aspect of care with people and their families, so that end of life care could be provided in accordance with people’s choices and preferences.

We were told the service planned to have an end of life ‘champion’ who would lead by example and support other staff. There were comfort baskets in use. These contained items aimed to ease discomfort or anxiety for people and their families.