Estherene 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 identified people’s person centred specific needs and guidance for staff in how they were met. The care plans included information about people’s preferences in how they wished to be cared for. A person’s relative told us how they felt their family member’s wellbeing had improved since they moved into the service, “[Family member] joined in quickly with other people and staff… [other relative said family member] seemed more perkier. I thought it must be [family member’s] brain being stimulated by other people around [them]. The freedom to walk freely around the care home and to go into the courtyard, whenever [family member] wants.” Another relative said their family member was, “Looked after very well.”

People’s daily records demonstrated the care people received each day, and how people presented. There were some documented social interactions, however, these were not as often as we had identified during our visits. The registered manager told us they reviewed daily notes and improvements were being made.

We were told by people and relatives how people had developed friendships and relationships in the service, which enhanced their wellbeing. A relative told us, “[Family member] has made a friend of a resident and [family member] says [they are] happy.”

People’s interests and hobbies were identified in their care plans. Staff provided support to assist people to do what they wanted to, both in groups and individually. We spoke with a staff member and a person, it was clear the staff member knew the person and what they liked to do, we talked about their interests and how the staff made sure they could watch a sport on the television, this made the person smile and they agreed. A relative told us, “I will often see [family member’s] artwork on display when I stop by. [Family member has] loved painting since [they were] in school so this is particularly special.”

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.

Staff received training in people’s diverse needs, including dementia, and how people expressed anxiety and distress. People’s care plans identified people’s diverse needs and how they were met. People’s conditions were identified in their care plans, how these affected their daily living and there were electronic links for staff to use to read about these conditions.

People had access to social activities both in the service and in the community. Some people using the service had taken the lead in activities, such as bingo and playing dominoes, which was well received by people living in the service. This was confirmed by a person, “We do the bingo Tuesdays and also dominoes Monday, few of us do it. Entertainment comes in.”

There was an activity coordinator working in the service, and when they were not working, a care staff member was rostered to provide activities on the weekends. An activity programme was in place, and as well as the planned group and one to one activities, there were external entertainers. Outings were organised including a café in a local park, the beach, watch bowls, and visit to the horse stables nearby. A relative told us, “They have had animals in there which my [family member] loved, rabbits, llamas sent me photographs. Also get the newsletters tell me what is going on… They took [family member] to the park in a wheelchair to feed the ducks, took [them] to look at the sea.” Another relative said, “There are a number of activities available and I know [family member] gets involved with about half of them. I love seeing the photos online on days when I have not been able to visit.” There was a library in the service with a large range of books, people could access.

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

People’s communication needs were identified in their care plans, and guidance for staff on how to effectively communicate. This included a person who used a communication book, when they felt they needed it.

Where people required documents in different accessible formats such as larger print, this could be provided. We saw the menu was provided on the dining room tables, and this was also provided in larger print.

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 was a complaints procedure in place which was posted in the service for the attention of people, staff and visitors. A person’s relative told us, “Any problems or concerns I have I go to the manager or deputy manager with my concerns and express them. So, no problem there. I'm listened to.”

Meetings were held for people using the service and relatives, to enable them to share their views of the service. The minutes of the meetings showed they were kept up to date with any changes in the service and what actions had been taken as a result of their comments. The registered manager told us a person using the service had taken feedback from other people and shared with the management team. They were considering how to formalise the role as a representative. During feedback to the assessment, the registered manager told us this had been done, and the person was happy with this, and had made arrangements for how they wanted the management team to work with them.

There were notice boards in the service, which demonstrated what had been done when people had made suggestions or comments, including in satisfaction surveys and meetings, such as more outings in the community. Newsletters were sent to relatives which updated them on any changes in the service and activities people had participated in.

We saw a letter sent to people’s relatives asking for their preferences of how often they wished to be involved in people’s care reviews, where appropriate.

The electronic signing in device, asked visitors for their feedback when they signed out. A record of this was checked by the management team if any improvements were needed. However, we saw a recent print out, which showed 5-star satisfaction.

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

Staff supported people to access support and treatment in the community, such as health professionals. Where difficulties were faced, actions were taken to remove the barriers. For example, we saw a staff member attend a health appointment with a person, when they could not have their appointment in the service.

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 told us they felt they were treated fairly and equally.

The service was dementia friendly, including signage to help people to navigate around the home, coloured toilet seat to help people to recognise the difference, people had chosen the colour of their bedroom doors, and these were designed to look like a front door with a letter box and knocker. People had chosen the various murals around the service.

The registered manager told us staff had received training and they had the bronze framework for being a veteran friendly service. There were displays in the service and the management team told us about the community veteran organisations they were accessing.

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’s care records included information about where they wished to be cared for should they become unwell, such as in hospital or remain at the care home. The care plans also included people’s decisions of if they wished to be resuscitated and if they had a recommended summary plan for emergency care and treatment (REPECT) form in place. This is a documented record of agreements and clinical recommendations for people’s care in an emergency or end of life, in case they were not able to make decisions at the time.

We saw cards sent to the service from relatives thanking them for the care provided, some relating to their family member’s end of life. Comments in the cards included, “For the final weeks, everyone's support and care made it all the more bearable,” and, “Our appreciation on the care you gave [family member] and respect at the end of [their] life.”