Ruby 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.

This the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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 were treated in a person-centred way that reflected their individual needs and respected what was important to them. People were supported to create their own routines. This gave people greater choice and control over how they wanted to live their lives.

The service 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 experienced care from regular staff who followed structured care plans and knew their needs well. Staff were aware of key professionals and community contacts should they need additional support.

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

The provider assessed people’s communication needs during initial assessments and made adjustments to support effective communication. Care plans detailed individual communication preferences and any aids required. Information was available in accessible formats, including easy read.

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 not received any complaints. However, they had a complaints policy in place. People were supported to share feedback, make suggestions, and raise any concerns about the care, treatment, and support they received. People were able to share their views at house meetings. The registered manager ensured any points raised by people were reviewed, planned and acted on.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People were supported to make choices about how and when their care and support was delivered. The service was flexible, and people told us they were aware that they could request changes to their care plans. We observed staff making changes to this care plan, engaging with the person regarding the changes and ensuring these were implemented in practice.

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. Staff had received training in equality, diversity and inclusion. This meant staff had knowledge and understanding about how to support everyone to feel valued and respected, with equal access to opportunities.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, including end of life care, so they had time to make informed decisions about their future. Those who wished to discuss their preferences had these recorded in their care plans. These were detailed and person centred, capturing what mattered most to people. Not everyone had a plan in place, but this reflected people’s personal choice.