Crows Nest

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.

Care plans were thorough and individualised, including information about people’s physical, mental, emotional and social needs.

People had access to their care plans and were involved in completing and updating these as required. A family member told us that they could look at care plans if they felt they needed to and, that communication was consistent between staff and relatives

People were empowered to make decisions about how they lived their lives, who they spent their time with and where they went.

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 had a good understanding of the needs of people with a learning disability and/or autistic people and had completed training in this area.

People received support flexibly around other activities such as volunteering roles and time spent with family to ensure that they received their full care package. Communication between the provider and partners providing day support to people was good.

There was a small, stable team of support staff, all of whom had been in post for many years. People enjoyed continuity of support from a group of familiar people.

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

Policies regarding GDPR and information sharing were in place, and staff were aware of their duties in relation to this.

The provider used paper copies of care plans, risk assessments and support documents so they were easily accessible by people. This included documents with pictures for people who understood these more easily.

Each person had a communication dictionary, specifying their preferred method of communication and how they may express themselves in different situations.

We saw evidence of staff communicating effectively with people who needed extra support.

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 had a complaints policy available to people in a format they could understand. All the people we spoke to knew how to complain, all said they were confident if they raised concerns, they would be addressed.

A family member also told us if they had any concerns, they knew who to contact and were satisfied their concerns would be investigated.

The provider kept a record of complaints and compliments to learn from these. People had the opportunity to discuss their support regularly in documented catch ups and resident meetings.

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

People were able to access their support in a way which worked for them, rotas were created to ensure that time spent with support staff was maximised to meet their needs in an effective way, this included ensuring appropriate staffing was available for appointments or activities.

Adjustments had been made to enable people, for example, the provider arranged downstairs accommodation for a person following a decline in their mobility.

We observed staff speaking respectfully to people using inclusive and non-discriminatory language.

Staff were available at all times; there was also an arrangement for a senior member of staff to be available on call in case of emergency.

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 that their staff team treated them kindly and with respect, they told us that they felt listened to and valued. All people we spoke to confirmed they would approach a member of staff or leadership if they needed to raise a concern. All said that they would be taken seriously and their concerns addressed.

Staff were trained in Equality, Diversity and Human Rights.

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 plans included information about death and dying. This was addressed sensitively with people. They were encouraged to think about their end of life wishes and make advanced decisions if they wished to.