Mary's 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.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.

Relatives said staff encouraged people to make choices about their lives and about the support they received. They said where this was not possible staff would ask the relatives to contribute to the process to help enable staff to respect people's decisions and choices. One relative said, "We are invited to reviews where we discuss with staff how our [family member] is getting on. Staff ask us and [family member] what we would like."

Care plans detailed people's physical, mental, emotional and social needs and integrated these needs into an outcome-based plan of support structured to ensure these needs were met effectively. The support plan outcomes for people were drawn up together with them, their relatives and health and social care professionals where appropriate and were signed off by all parties involved in the process.

Plans were reviewed on a regular basis appropriate to each individual person's needs. This meant people received individualised care and support to meet their changing needs.

Behavioural support plans were in place for people who needed them and we saw they had really helped to reduce these behaviours. The impact of this had helped to improve people's quality of life and enabled them to engage in more of their chosen activities.

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’s care records evidenced they received consistent care across different settings and from different healthcare professionals. This included with their GP and community nursing teams. A record for each person was maintained detailing visits and communication with other professionals.

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

People and relatives said they were provided with information and advice that was accessible and accurate in a way they could understand. People told us the staff team was approachable and could ask for information and this would be provided.

Staff understood the importance of ensuing information was up to date and accurate regarding people’s care and support needs. The staff team were aware of how to communicate with people to ensure communication was effective.

Communication care plans were in place to ensure staff had clear guidance and information to follow.

Since 2016 onwards all organisations that provide publicly funded adult social care are legally required to follow the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The standard was introduced to make sure people are given information in a way they understand. The standard applies to all people with a disability, impairment or sensory loss and in some circumstances to their carers. People's communication needs were assessed and information to do with people’s communication preferences and how staff might meet those needs were documented.

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 used regular feedback surveys for people, their relatives, staff and other professionals to share feedback and ideas or raise complaints. The resulting feedback needed to be analysed and trends identified. The registered manager told us they were in the process of doing this so that improvement actions could be taken where necessary.

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

People were supported to access healthcare services when needed. We found people received their care and support when they needed this. They received their care and support in line with their stated preferences.

We found the home was accessible for all people and this meant people were not excluded.

Processes were in place to ensure people could access the care and support they needed. The registered manager undertook assessments, monitoring and reviews of people’s care needs and used this information to plan care and support in line with people’s preferences.

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.

People received care and support that was personalised, coordinated and worked well for them. Relatives told us staff listened to them and their family members. They said they were confident in the management of the service. Comments from one relative, “My family member is very happy. Staff are really supportive and they know people well.” Another relative spoke about the improvements they had noted in their family member since moving to the service.

People were treated equally and without prejudices and all staff receive training in equality, diversity and inclusion. Comments from staff included, " We treat everyone equally. No one is discriminated against." "People are given the time they need, but it depends on their mood and if they want staff to be with them. Each day is different." Staff received training in meeting people’s communication needs and spoke of different ways of communicating. Staff told us," We have people who are nonverbal, so it's important to use methods they understand. We speak slowly and face them so they can read our lips, we also write things down, we use large print for those that struggle with normal print, and pictures for people who can’t read anymore."

Regular meetings took place which provided people, relatives and staff with opportunities to raise concerns, share ideas and be involved in decisions relating to the home. The provider had quality assurance systems in place which had recently been revised and upgraded. These were used to check the quality of service provided to people. Throughout our assessment the owner and the registered manager were open to feedback, taking swift action to drive improvement across the service. They told us, “We will continue to strive to improve our service and resident’s experience, and to consider any feedback an opportunity to succeed.”

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 had the opportunity to discuss their wishes and preferences for end-of-life care to ensure they can make informed decisions regarding their care and support.

Staff had completed end of life training. The management team told us people’s wishes were discussed during the care planning stage and this was reviewed if people’s wishes changed.