Alexander House 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 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 was delivered in a person-centred way, people and relatives praised the team for the care they provided. Care records included people’s backgrounds, likes and preferences. When needs changed staff supported people to meet their changing needs. For example, following a fall a person needed additional equipment and a change of their environment. The team assessed the needs and followed any health care recommendations. People’s bedrooms were personalised for example, one person had lots of family pictures and ornaments which they said meant a lot to them. During our visit we observed people choosing meals and activities. Staff were patient and attentive, respecting people decisions.

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 had access to a range of health care professionals when needed. This meant peoples’ needs could be met in a timely manner. Staff worked well together. Staff retention was high which meant there was continuity for people living at the service.Peoples’ family and friends could visit people at any time, there were no visiting restrictions.During our visit we saw families enjoying a meal with people.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People and their relatives told us the communication was good in the home. A newsletter was sent to people and relatives to keep them up to date with events and news stories. Relatives told us they were kept up to date with changes to care needs. One relative said, “I get a phone call once a month, have a chat about their [relative] general well being. They did have a couple of falls when they first went in, and they let me know straightaway. They [staff] keep me updated with their weight, they are weighed weekly and it’s all on the computer system.” Peoples’ communication needs were assessed, and their preferences were recorded in their care records.

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 and their relatives were involved in the home and could contribute to decisions. Feedback was obtained in several ways, through residents’ meetings, reviews and surveys. One relative said, “I did go to one [meeting]. It was to announce a change in the manager of the home. I get a monthly newsletter.” People and relatives said they knew who to complain to if they needed to. One relative said, “I see [Name of staff] quite often as I am coming in. Any questions I send them by email to [name] and they tell me who to speak to.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People could access health care professionals when required, one person said, “I am seeing the GP tomorrow. I did meet a chiropodist the other day and she is coming to cut my nails when she comes the next time.” Referrals to health care professionals were made in a timely manner. The GP visited the home on a regular basis. During our visit the district nurse was visiting a person for wound management.

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 and relatives told us they had good care and outcomes were individual. The home provided a variety of activities tailored to individuals. The home was purpose built and accessible for people with mobility issues including the outdoor spaces.

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. Care records were tailored for everyone. End of life care plans were in place if required. People’s wishes and how they wanted to be treated was recorded. Relatives praised the staff for respecting people’s end of life wishes. People received dignified support at the end of their life.