Highgrove

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.Staff demonstrated a good understanding of the people they supported and were familiar with individuals’ routines and personal preferences. They recognised the importance of delivering person‑centred care and ensuring people were given choice and control over how they lived their daily lives. Personal preferences were clearly documented, enabling staff to provide support in line with each person’s wishes.

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. The provider had developed effective working relationships with health and social care professionals to help promote and maintain people’s health and wellbeing. One partner commented, “Staff on the whole know when to refer to our teams and escalate via the correct pathways we have in place. The teams there know the residents well and are treated with respect and dignity.” The service had also established connections within the local community, enabling a variety of events and activities to support social inclusion. Systems were in place to monitor and review care, including arrangements to ensure care was delivered consistently.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Care plans clearly outlined each person’s preferred methods of communication, ensuring staff had the information needed to engage with people in ways that were meaningful and effective. Relatives told us staff were approachable and consistently willing to discuss any questions or concerns, which helped maintain open and transparent communication between the service and families. One relative told us, “I feel I can chat with the manager and in fact I’ve just spoken with [name of manager] and they’ve given me a full update as I’ve been away for the weekend.”

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 service maintained a log of complaints and compliments and where action was needed this was taken and outcomes recorded. People and their relatives told us that they knew how to make a complaint if they needed to. One relative told us, “I have no complaints about this place, they have been wonderful with my [name of relative]. If there had been issues, I would have definitely told them but its all been very good.” A person commented, “I am comfortable here and have nothing to complain about.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People were supported by staff who worked proactively to identify and reduce any barriers that might limit their ability to access care, participate in daily activities, or maintain their wellbeing. Staff took time to understand the individual challenges people faced and implemented practical solutions to help them overcome these. This included advocating on their behalf, adapting communication approaches, and ensuring the environment or support arrangements were suitable for their needs.

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. Regular reviews of people’s care were carried out to ensure their support continued to reflect their needs and to identify any new goals. The provider had policies, training, and systems in place to promote equality and encourage both people and staff to speak up if they had concerns.

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. Conversations were held with people and their families to set goals and plan for future care needs. These discussions included decisions relating to Do Not Attempt Resuscitation (DNAR), where appropriate. People’s preferences and wishes, including those relating to end‑of‑life care, were clearly recorded within care plans to ensure staff had accurate guidance on how individuals wished to be supported.