Archived: Squires Mews 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 Squires Mews Care Home since it was registered. 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 told us they received person-centred care in line with their needs and preferences.A relative said, “[Person] is independent with eating, but prefers to eat in their room as it takes them longer to eat due to Parkinson's. Staff don't rush [Person] and tend to pop in to check if they need anything and will bring the next course, once [Person] is ready for it.” People’s care plans were of good quality, written in a person-centred way, and reflected their preferences, mental, emotional and social needs and abilities. People’s relative were informed about any changes or concerns about their family member. A relative said, “After a few months of being there, [Person] was reassessed and moved floors, and they have become more social and join in with activities.”

Staff had good knowledge about people’s individual preferences, lifestyle and respected their individual routines. Staff understood the different experiences of people living with dementia and provided appropriate support. The low sounding call bells helped to reduce the risk of people being distressed by the sound. People had personalised their bedrooms with personal possessions, books, ornaments and photographs.

The wellbeing staff supported people to participate in activities of interest; both group settings and on an individual basis. People benefited from this personalised approach. People’s diverse and spiritual needs were met, with regular visits from the local church. A relative told us, “When they first went in it was a new lease of life for them on the social side. Photos are posted on Facebook every day of them doing the activities. I’m very impressed with the variety they provide. They couldn’t have done anymore, they got [Person] a patch of green so they could practice their putting, and they brought them some bulbs to plan in the garden.”

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 to access health care services as required. Staff had a good understanding of people’s health and care needs. People’s care was well documented detailing how to meet people’s health needs and was kept up to date. This enabled staff to share information effectively internally, with healthcare professionals in the event of a medical emergency or when people were referred to other agencies when required.

The registered manager and staff worked in partnership with health professionals. Health professionals and commissioners confirmed, where people’s care was funded, the registered manager contacted them in relation to reviewing people’s care when their needs had changed. A visiting health professional told us, “Staff are knowledgeable about people’s needs; recognise changes and decline and will contact [district nurse] for advice. Appropriate referrals are made when needed.” The local authority’s latest quality monitoring visit carried out was positive and reflected quality care and support people received.

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

The provider was meeting the Accessible Information Standard (AIS), and ensured information was available in a variety of different formats and language as required. Staff understood people’s communication needs and styles and ensured information was available, for instance, in alternative formats, large print and digital formats.

People’s communication needs were identified and supported. Care plans included information about people’s preferred communication methods and instructed staff how to support them. We saw people had access to mobile phones and tablets that enabled them to remain in contact with family and friends. A relative told us staff were aware of their family member’s sensory needs and information was communicated clearly and their response was understood. We observed staff supporting people to choose from the menu options or the plated meals presented. Staff communicated effectively with people and recognised from observing body language when a person may be experiencing pain or discomfort.

People and relatives were confident their information was managed safely by staff and management. This was underpinned by data protection policy and procedure and staff training.

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 were involved in decisions made about their care and support. People and relatives knew how to raise concerns and most were confident concerns would be acted on. A relative said, “No complaints, quite the opposite. I’m very comfortable about talking to the registered manager when needed.” Some people and relatives expressed concerns which we shared with the registered manager and provider. They were aware of these concerns such as the quality of meals, and others were historic concerns, which had been addressed. A relative said, “They do have residents’ meetings and I get emailed the minutes. I haven’t complained but would feel comfortable approaching staff with any questions. When I have asked about things before, they have been very forthcoming.”

The provider had systems in place to gather people’s views and experiences of the service. All complaints and concerns had been investigated and responded to and analysed to prevent recurrence. Any lessons learnt was shared with staff. Residents and relatives meeting minutes were shared and included actions taken, for instance, changes to the menus. All feedback was analysed and shared using, ‘You said - We did’ approach, for example, people wanted more quizzes and activities, which had been actioned. This included murder mystery events, singers, and musicians which had been booked as well as social events in the evenings and at weekends.

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. Appropriate adjustments, adaptations and equipment required for their care needs was in place. Care plans had clear guidance to enable staff to support people in a way that works for them. Management and staff understood people had a right to receive equal access to health and care support, regardless of any disabilities and unique backgrounds. Staff had good relationships with the GP and health professionals, and knew how to access people’s information for medical emergencies or out of hours support. Records showed people were supported to attend health appointments and health screening and any instructions given had been followed by staff.

People told us there were no barriers to care and support needs. All areas in the care home was accessible by people using walking aids and wheelchairs including the garden which enabled people to live as independently as possible. There was good use of signage to support people to orientate around the care home. All areas were spacious and free from hazards to support people with mobility needs. We saw people choosing to sit in the quiet areas or the communal areas including the bistro where they could socialise with others or the garden which had sufficient shade to protect people from direct sunlight.

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.

The provider had an equality and diversity policy in place and was committed to providing a welcoming and inclusive environment for all people and staff. People’s care plans reflected their physical, mental, emotional and social needs and records showed staff supported people to access the care and treatment they needed. A relative said, “Since my [Person] moved to Squires over a year ago, they have been smiling. After a few months of being there [Person] was reassessed and moved floors where they could become more social and joined in with activities.” People’s health and wellbeing was monitored, and they were referred to health professionals when required. People’s care needs were monitored and reviewed regularly.

People told us they were not discriminated. The registered manager and staff recognised people’s experiences of care may differ. Staff were trained to ensure everyone including those living with dementia and other health conditions had positive experiences of care. People enjoyed social events and outings, using the accessible minibus. However, a relative told us their family member was not able to use the minibus because staff were not trained. This was raised with the registered manager who confirmed staff training was booked for July 2025. All areas of the care home was decorated and furnished to a high standard. The provider welcomed feedback about developing a more dementia-friendly environment, for instance, use of distinct colours to help people living with dementia to be able to differentiate areas, thus promoting their independence.

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 had their advance wishes about their future including receiving treatment if their health deteriorated recorded. A relative said, “[Person’s] care plan includes ‘Do Not Resuscitate’ (DNR) and their funeral plans.” Another relative described the end-of-life care journey their family member received. They said, “Not one member of staff mentioned the C (cancer) word, they treated my [Person] in the normal, friendly and helpful way to make their stay as comfortable as possible. Marie Currie team were involved, care plans were developed in discussion with me and my [Person]. [Person] had a peaceful and pain-free death.”

Staff had received training on end-of-life care. The registered manager showed us compliments staff had received from relatives about the care their loved ones had received including compassionate end-of-life care.