Elm House

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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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.

People’s care plans were person-centred and clearly showed what people wanted their care to look like. Care plans gave detailed, person-centred guidance to staff on how to support people as individuals. People were fully involved in planning their care and able to express what they wanted on a day-to-day basis. For example, having choice around food, activities and personal care. Staff knew people well and recognised if there were any changes in their needs.

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 home had a good relationship with external care providers such as GP’s, learning disability teams and the CHAT. This enabled staff to make sure people received a continuity of care when needed.

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

People had easy read care plans which used large font, simple language and pictures to show what people wanted from their care. Staff knew how to communicate with people in simple language and checked with them to ensure they understood. At the time of the inspection, people living at the service did not use any form of sign language such as Makaton or British Sign language. Staff told us people used signs that meant something to them and staff understood people’s individual communication needs.

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.

There were systems in place to gain feedback from people, relatives and healthcare professionals who worked with the home. Feedback was gathered throughout the year and collated annually. This information helped the service see what they were doing well and identify any areas for improvement. Staff also understood that people with a learning disability may express feedback in different ways. For example, through body language. People who were unable to communicate verbally expressed whether they enjoyed something or not through body language and facial expressions. Staff knew people, well and used the feedback to improve people’s experiences.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People were able to access care, treatment and support when they need to and in a way that worked for them, which promoted equality, helped remove barriers or delays and protected their rights.Care plans included a ‘hospital passport’. This is a document that people could take if they were admitted to hospital or had healthcare appointments and it included important information about the person. This included information such as people’s communication needs, things that could trigger distress, medical history, their likes and dislikes. This ensured that hospital staff were aware of the person and their needs.

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 were committed to reviewing people’s care and support on an ongoing basis as people’s needs and wishes changed over time. This meant people received effective and appropriate care and improved outcomes for them including leading happier and healthier lives.

The provider complied with legal equality and human rights requirements, including avoiding discrimination, having regard to the needs of people with different protected characteristics. Staff had received training in equality and diversity and were aware of potential barriers people with a learning disability faced.

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.

People and relatives, where appropriate, were consulted about end-of-life care. Where people were willing to discuss this, their wishes and preferences were documented in their care plans. Staff also respected people’s wishes if they did not wish to discuss this.