Maids Moreton Hall

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 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 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.

A relative raised concerns that changes to the environment had resulted in the removal of features they felt supported people living with dementia. Signage was not always easy to distinguish, colour contrast between walls and surrounding features was limited, and personalised signs or other landmarks were not consistently available to help people identify their rooms. This meant the environment did not always support people living with dementia to orientate themselves and navigate the home independently.

People’s care records did not always contain information about how their medical conditions affected them. People’s daily records of care were mostly generic and did not always contain specific information regarding the care people received.

We gave feedback to the provider and they took action to address these concerns.

However, people’s care plans contained personalised information regarding their histories, their preferences and dislikes in relation to food and drink, and how they liked to take their medicines.

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 were supported by a consistent staff team. The provider worked collaboratively with health and social care professionals to support continuity of care. Staff made and followed up referrals appropriately and shared relevant information to help ensure people received coordinated support. This helped to promote consistent, person-centred support and maintain continuity in care provision.

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

The Accessible Information Standard ensures people with disabilities, impairments or sensory loss receive information in a format they can understand and communication support appropriate to their needs. Services should identify, record, share, meet and regularly review these needs so people can access care, make informed decisions and participate fully in their care and support.

People’s communication needs were identified and recorded, with reasonable adjustments made where required. This included providing information in large print and using technology to support people to choose and access music and audiobooks. This supported people to access information and make choices in ways that met their individual communication needs.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support, however, did not always tell them what had changed as a result.

The provider had an in-date complaints policy. People and their relatives confirmed they were able to share feedback in meetings, emails, or calls, however, people’s relatives gave mixed feedback regarding complaints they had made and whether changes were made as a result.

A person’s relative told us, “You don’t get much response when you raise issues, I wrote to the managing director, and I think the letter went to every level of management before being sent back to the registered manager to answer. It’s all passed on, never dealt with.” Another person’s relative told us, “All I get is ‘sorry’, but nothing changes.” Further feedback from other relatives included, “I have put in a complaint, but I have had no response from the manager not even to say they have received it. Whenever you complain they just don’t answer you.”

However, people told us they would feel confident in raising feedback with the registered manager. Comments included, “There aren’t any concerns. If there was a problem I’d talk to a carer, no-one in particular”, “I always go to [Registered Manager] with my concern” and “The manager is very nice, I see her sometimes.”

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

The provider operated an on-call system which staff were able to seek support in the event of an emergency. Staff were also able to access a telehealth service for people if they required out-of-hours support. The service was designed and adapted to meet the needs of people who required environmental adjustments, including those who used wheelchairs. People were supported to access most areas of the home during core hours, supporting independence, freedom of movement, and opportunities for socialisation across units.

Staff and leaders 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.

Care records reflected people’s diverse needs and protected characteristics, enabling staff to provide personalised care. Staff were aware of people's communication needs and took action to support effective communication. People were supported to practise their faith. A person told us, “I’m a catholic, a priest comes once a month, I have communion then and I’ve been to the church nearby.” This promoted equality, inclusion and person-centred care.

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.

We observed staff providing respectful and compassionate end of life care and maintaining people’s dignity following their death. Care plans contained information about whether people had a DNACPR or ResPECT form. DNACPR forms are where people can express their wishes about being resuscitated. ResPECT forms are where people’s wishes regarding emergency medical care are recorded when they are unable to express them in the future.