Eccleshare Court

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 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People and their relatives were involved in decisions about care and support. However, care plans did not always fully reflect people's individual needs and preferences.

Relatives were positive about their involvement in care planning and decision-making. One relative told us, "I am involved in planning the care as I have the Power of Attorney. Adult Social Services are involved as well. They want the best for [my family member] but also make sure that relatives are kept informed." Another relative said staff had kept in touch with them on the phone throughout the admission process.

However, the quality of care planning was inconsistent. Whilst some records contained personalised information, others lacked sufficient detail regarding people's preferences and how they wished to be supported. In some cases, people who had lived at the home for several years had care plans which contained only limited personalised detail, providing little insight into their life history or what was important to them. This reduced assurance that care plans consistently reflected people's individuality and provided staff with sufficient guidance to deliver person-centred care.

Feedback from relatives indicated people's preferences were not always consistently reflected in practice. For example, one relative told us their family member had been provided with a ham sandwich despite being a vegetarian and expressed concerns that opportunities to participate in activities were not always promoted in line with their relative's wishes or abilities.

There were opportunities to further develop the environment for people living with dementia. Signage, room identification and environmental cues were not always designed in a way that would support people to orientate themselves independently around the home. Some communal spaces lacked sensory or visual features which could further promote engagement, independence and a sense of familiarity for people living with dementia.

People experienced continuity of care through effective communication and partnership working with relatives and other professionals.

Relatives described positive experiences when people moved into the service and told us staff worked closely with them to ensure people's needs were understood. One relative said, "[My family member] went into care suddenly but has settled in very quickly. I think this place is very good. The staff are very vigilant and they keep me informed."

Relatives consistently told us they were kept informed about changes in people's health and wellbeing. One relative said, "They keep me informed [for example] if [my family member] has a fall, they will make sure that I know about it." Others described being contacted regarding healthcare appointments and changes in treatment.

Records demonstrated the provider worked alongside relatives and healthcare professionals to help ensure people's care remained coordinated when needs changed.

People and those important to them were able to access information in ways that met their needs.

The provider had information available in different formats to support people's varying communication needs. Training records showed staff had completed General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) training to support the appropriate handling and sharing of personal information.

Communication needs had been identified for people living at the home and staff demonstrated an understanding of how to communicate effectively with people. However, the quality of communication plans was inconsistent. Whilst communication needs were recorded, some plans lacked sufficient detail about people's preferred methods of communication and the specific approaches staff should use when sharing information and supporting decision-making. The provider had identified the need to review care planning documentation to improve its quality and consistency.

People and their relatives felt able to raise concerns and were confident these would be listened to and acted upon.

People and relatives told us they felt comfortable speaking with staff if they had concerns about care and support. One relative said, "If I had any concerns I would initially talk to a carer, or whoever I run into first."

Relatives were positive about how concerns were handled. One relative described raising concerns and felt the service had listened and responded appropriately.

Relatives described being kept informed about matters affecting their family members and felt comfortable discussing issues with staff when required. One relative told us, "If I had any safety concerns I would speak to any of the [staff] who would talk to the nurses."

The provider sought feedback from people and relatives through resident and relative meetings, providing opportunities for people to share their views and contribute to service development.

People were able to access care and support that met their needs. People were supported to attend healthcare appointments and access healthcare services when required. Healthcare professionals, including GPs and other specialist services, visited people in the home where appropriate, helping to ensure people could access timely care and treatment without unnecessary disruption.

Relatives described the home as suitable for people's needs and spoke positively about the support available.

Leaders and staff demonstrated an awareness of the importance of reducing barriers to accessing services. This included exploring specialist dementia-friendly initiatives and services within the home to enhance people's wellbeing and experiences.

People reported positive experiences of living at the home, and we received no concerns regarding discrimination or unequal treatment.

People and their relatives were largely positive about the care and support provided and described staff as caring and compassionate. There was no evidence to suggest people's experiences or outcomes were negatively affected by protected characteristics or other individual differences.

People were supported to make decisions about their future care.

Some care records included information about people's future care wishes and preferences. Where people did not wish to discuss future care planning, staff respected these decisions and revisited conversations at appropriate times.

Records relating to emergency care and treatment decisions were in place where appropriate. However, these did not consistently evidence how people had been involved in discussions about their future wishes and preferences or, where appropriate, how family members and representatives had contributed to these decisions. This reduced assurance that future care planning consistently reflected people's views and choices.

Following feedback, the provider had begun reviewing these records to ensure people and those important to them were appropriately involved in discussions about future care and treatment, and that decisions were clearly recorded and reflected their wishes and preferences.