Thornfield 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 since October 2024. 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. Care records reviewed showed people’s likes and preferences were recorded and acted upon. People were at the centre of their care and support. People and relatives told us they were involved in care plans and reviews. One relative said, "Yes I feel included in all decisions regarding their care”.

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 provider worked well with the local authority and health care professionals. People’s care was consistent. The provider made sure they contacted the right professionals when needs changed or new needs were identified.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Records reviewed showed they were tailored to people’s needs. Menu boards were done in pictorial form. Large print documents could be provided when needed. People’s communication needs were assessed and clearly documented. Staff had guidance when needed. During our visit we saw staff supporting people with information in a way which was appropriate for them, for example, reading a sign out loud or showing a person a picture so they could make a choice about a meal. This meant people could be included in decisions about the service.

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. The provider had a clear complaints process in place. Feedback from people and relatives was used to improve the service. For example, staffing levels were increased because of concerns raised by relatives. The provider used different ways to engage with people, for example, through face-to-face meetings. Through feedback forms and residents’ meetings. This meant that people could be confident that their views would be listened to and their concerns addressed.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The provider worked alongside health care professionals. Referrals were made in a timely manner. People had access to all health care provision.

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. Care was tailored to each person. Outcomes were achievable and monitored by the team. Health care professionals were involved in the service. Staff promoted people’s rights in order to meet their needs.

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 provider had a clear plan in place to support people to plan including end of life care. End of life care plans were in place for some people. Staff had a good understanding of end-of-life care and what this may entail. At the time of the inspection, no one was in receipt of end-of-life care.