Orchard View

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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Outstanding. At this assessment the rating has changed to Good.

This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 68 (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 always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Staff demonstrated good knowledge of people’s preferences and needs, with person -centred interactions observed. We observed staff using approaches to reduce distress and overstimulation, including using a sensory space and distraction techniques when people needed calm.

People were supported to maintain relationships and engage in meaningful activities, including those enjoyed prior to moving in, for example running.

Relatives were very positive about individualised support and meaningful activity, including daily community access and hobbies

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.

Delivered support hours were consistently recorded in daily notes, demonstrating clear oversight of care provided. Staff had completed relevant training, including Oliver McGowan Learning Disability and Autism training and Dementia awareness, supporting competent care delivery.

Care was provided by a consistent staff team, with no use of agency staff and bank staff utilised when required to maintain continuity. Relatives reported effective communication and felt well informed about care, reflecting positive engagement and coordinated support.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The provider did not always make sure people received information in a way they could easily access and understand, which limited people’s ability to be fully informed about their care.

We saw a range of easy read information available, including safeguarding information and other accessible documents. However, since the move to electronic records, nobody had their own copy of their care plan, and not everyone could access records in the office. We discussed the need for printed copies and easy read versions where appropriate and the registered manager assured us these would be put in place where required.

Relatives described being kept updated, but the service still needs to ensure people themselves can consistently access key information about their support.

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 listened to people and involved them in decisions about the service and acted on feedback to improve people’s experience.

People were involved in recruitment, including taking part in interviewing new staff. The service used individual meetings, a suggestion box and a “you said, we did” approach, with examples of actions taken such as providing requested items, for example, a larger television and an air fryer.

People and their relative’s felt staff were attentive and responsive, and said they could raise issues and would be informed of any concerns.

The provider did not always make sure everyone could access support in an equitable way, because reasonable adjustments to meet physical needs were not consistently in place.

Care plans included people’s communication, sensory and mobility needs, and people and relatives confirmed support was available when needed. However, one person’s mobility needs were not adequately met in relation to shower access. Although this was discussed and steps were being taken, we were not assured of timely completion as no date was provided during the assessment. This meant the service needs to strengthen oversight to ensure adjustments are planned, recorded and completed within clear timescales for everyone.

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 achieved equitable experiences and outcomes, with staff understanding people well and supporting them to have fulfilling lives.

Staff had completed equality training, and relevant policies were in place. People were supported to pursue interests and goals, including community activities and planning experiences they valued. The service used ‘bucket lists’ to help people plan what they wanted to do over the coming year, and we saw examples of this being used to support decision-making.
Relatives described improved wellbeing and 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.

The provider supported people to plan for their future needs and wishes, including documenting what mattered to them and reviewing support.

Care plans included information about people’s end of life wishes and made clear people could change these at any time. The registered manager described how key information (such as Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions, if in place) would be recorded within the electronic care system.

People also planned for the year ahead through discussions about preferred activities and trips, supported by visual information to help them decide.