Carrstone 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 service. This key question has been rated as requires improvement.

This meant people’s needs were not always met.

This service scored 54 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices, and they did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. We found that care plans and risk assessments did not always include up to date information. We received mixed feedback from people and their relatives about being involved in care planning. One relative said, “I don't remember going over a care plan at all.” While another said, "one care-plan discussion was cut short by an emergency; we never saw the final plan."

There were some shortfalls in how the provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was not always joined-up, flexible or supportive of choice and continuity. High staff turnover and agency use were raised as a concern by people who use the service, their relatives and health professionals. Feedback included, "Established staff know [family member] well, but unfamiliar agency staff cause uncertainty." And " The levels of knowledge and professionalism have been variable. The Care home has had 4 managers since opening and has also been led for periods of time by the regional manager, leading in breaks to continuity of leadership."

The provider said that they attempt to use the same agency staff to provide continuity.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People received information in a way that met their individual needs Care plans included a communication section which included details of health conditions which may affect people's ability to communicate and guidance for staff to follow.

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

Staff did not always involve people in decisions about their care or tell them what had changed as a result. The provider had a complaints policy in place and people and relatives new how to make complaints. However, we received concerns from people and relatives about being involved in care reviews, response to complaints and communication from the service. 1 relative said, “It does feel very much like you're banging your head against a brick wall about everything.” While another relative said, " Communication isn’t very good and [family member] doesn’t always feel [they] are getting spoken too and concerns discussed with [them].

The provider did not make sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. We found that referrals to health professionals were not always made in a timely manner. Medical advice was not always sought at the time health concerns were raised and we found that staff often waited to discuss this with the health professional who attended the service on a weekly basis. 1 person’s daily care notes included they had waited up to 6 days for medical advice to be sought after raising a new health concern.

Staff and leaders did not always actively listen to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. This meant people’s care was not always tailored in response to this. Staff did not always work well with healthcare professionals or follow advice that had been provided to them. This meant that people did not always receive the care that provided them with positive outcomes.

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 plans included detailed information about people's wishes at the end of their life, including details of any resuscitation and hospital admission decisions that had been made.