Golden Horizon 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 involved people in their care and treatment choices, and they decided, where possible, in partnership with people and their relatives how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. People's care plans were person centred and some sections had detailed information. However, within the care plans we reviewed, there were some inconsistencies regarding what support people required. For example,1 person’s care plan had inconsistent information on what support they required with their mobility and how staff should reposition them. Another person who was residing at the home for a short stay had limited information in their care plan, which did not always inform staff on how and what support should be delivered. We shared this with the home manager and provider who told us they would undertake a review of all care plans. Staff demonstrated good knowledge of what peoples care plans entailed and were able to share specific details of people’s preferences and how they liked to be supported.

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. External healthcare professionals were involved in advising and supporting the care people received. There were regular healthcare professionals which visited the service, these included GPs, Advanced nursed and Care practitioners. People benefitted from a stable staff team who knew them well. Staff worked well together to provide continuity of care and followed advice from healthcare professionals. Information was shared between staff during handovers about any changes in people’s needs so everyone was kept informed. There were several other external agencies which visited the service to offer different activity sessions, some of these included music and pet therapy sessions. One relative told us, “They have dogs and animals come in, [relatives name] is older but still likes to be involved. There is a board up with what is planned every day and there seems to be something most days. Another relative said “They have two lounges one is quieter and one has activities. Staff come round and speak to people all the time. I sometimes do a bit of singing for them”. The service had held a garden party in the summer where people and relatives had enjoyed spending time with friends and family. The service had formed excellent links with a local primary school who had visited for VE day and Christmas celebrations. Feedback from the school had been shared with the service. “We had a wonderful experience visiting Golden Horizon Care Home. The residents and staff were incredibly warm and welcoming, and it was a joy to see such meaningful interactions between them and the children. The atmosphere in the home felt caring and inclusive, with a clear focus on engagement and overall wellbeing. The visit was not only enjoyable but also deeply enriching for our pupils, leaving a lasting positive impression on everyone involved”. There were plans in place for the children to visit again this year. People had also made the children individual Christmas boxes which were greatly received.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Staff provided information in the most appropriate way for people. People’s communication needs were assessed and documented in their care plans, however it was not always described what support was needed to communicate effectively with people. Whilst we saw no impact to people, we shared this with the home manager to ensure improvements were made. We saw examples of pictorial aid support and there were notice boards in communal areas of the service which provided information to people about upcoming events. Relatives told us they were updated of any changes in relation to their loved one’s care needs, but some relatives felt communication regarding changes to staff and management could be improved. We shared this with the home manager and providers who planned to implement a monthly newsletter to improve communication with relatives. This included a management update, activities overview, upcoming events, birthdays and celebrations, staffing updates, service improvements, and relative meeting notices.

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. Annual surveys were sent to relatives and staff, and healthcare professionals could share their views with a comments box which was located at the entrance of the building. A summary of the outcomes was produced in a ‘You said we did’ format. As a result of some of the feedback an additional food cupboard was added to the dining room and a mobile phone was purchased for families to speak with people. The home manager had introduced a ‘grumbles log’. 55 grumbles had been logged for the previous 3 months. Each grumble had a logged time, person’s name, the issue, what action has been taken, the outcome and how the resident felt. The home manager told us this had been beneficial with ensuring any grumbles people had raised could be addressed promptly. Relatives told us they knew how to raise a complaint should they need to and felt concerns would be listened to and acted upon. One relative shared “Never had to make a complaint. You can't fault them at all”. The provider had a complaints procedure in place and complaints were recorded and any actions required had been implemented.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Care plans provided staff with an overview of people’s needs and any barriers they might experience in receiving care, support and treatment. For example, mobility and accessibility or communication barriers. Staff supported people to access care, support and treatment when they needed it and relatives confirmed this. Some people were supported to attend appointments with family members. One relative told us, “The local practice nurse goes in weekly and sees anyone who needs it. The opticians used to go in but they now need to attend at the hospital. If they have to go to the hospital either I or the home arranges it. They go in a taxi and either I go or a member of staff assists”. External health professionals told us staff made referrals in a timely manner, although with the recent changes in management communication could be improved. There was a 24 hour on-call system in place to provide support to people and staff if needed provided by the home manager and providers.

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. Staff ensured people were supported to have equitable outcomes. People and their relatives did not report any concerns related to discrimination or unequal experiences. All staff had completed the relevant mandatory training requirements and understood how to protect people from any discriminatory practices.

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. There were systems in place to record people’s advanced wishes, where they chose to discuss them. People had ReSPECT forms in place. ReSPECT stands for Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment and ensures their personal wishes are followed. These were reviewed regularly and specified people’s choices regarding resuscitation in the event they needed emergency treatment.