Magnolia 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 is the first assessment for this service since registration under the new provider. 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 felt their needs were met in a way they liked, and relatives told us they were happy with the care provided. A relative said, “They [staff] have a good bond with my relative." They added, "[Person] sometimes think they work [at the home] and sits with staff but that is ok, and staff support them, in their world." Another relative told us, “They [staff] accept them as they are. They are part of the family.”

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s support needs and preferences. They understood what person-centred care meant and we observed this in practice during the assessment visits.

People’s individual care records contained detailed personalised information, including their likes and dislikes, personal abilities and social interests and preferences, as well as spiritual or religious views and what support may be required to meet these.

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 management team and staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s diverse health and care needs. Staff and the management team shared information effectively during handovers and through care records and daily notes, which ensured people received consistent support from staff who understood their routines and preferences.

People and their relatives told us staff understood what care they may need and were confident staff would support them well when they received care from other health and social care organisations. Relatives confirmed they were informed if their family members required support from other agencies.

Continuity of care was supported because people’s needs were regularly reviewed by the management team and staff.

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

People’s communication needs were assessed during the assessment process, with information recorded about how staff could communicate with them. This included information on any equipment used to promote effective communication, glasses and hearing aids for example. The manager told us people and relatives would be provided with written information in different formats and alternative languages if required.

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.

Feedback from people using the service and their relatives indicated that the management team listened to their views and involved them in decisions about their care and support. Relatives told us they were kept informed about changes in their family member's care, involved in care planning and reviews, and maintained regular communication with the management team. Comments included, “When [person] was first admitted we sat down with staff and went through their likes and dislikes as part of the care planning”, "My relative was admitted from hospital, and the staff have really helped and supported me during what has been a difficult time", "They [staff] always keep us informed of [person’s] progress” and “They do send me things and ring me up if there are major changes and I get little emails that [person] needs new meds etc.”

Records showed that people and relatives knew how to raise concerns or make a complaint. We reviewed complaint records and found that concerns had been investigated and responded to in line with the provider's complaints policy and procedure. People and relatives confirmed they were confident to raise concerns and that these would be listened to and acted on effectively.

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

People's care plans contained information in relation to people’s protected characteristics, beliefs and preferences and considered people’s needs and any adjustments that could be made to ensure they had equal access to services.

People’s health and wellbeing were monitored and when there were changes or their condition deteriorated, their level of support was reviewed and any necessary changes implemented. Community agencies, such as GPs and community nurses were contacted when specialist support was needed to meet people’s needs and improve their quality of life. When people experienced barriers to accessing appropriate care, such as delays in receiving specialist support, the staff advocated on their behalf. This helped ensure people were supported to access the care and support they needed when they needed it.

Arrangements were in place to ensure staff had appropriate access to support for emergencies when a member of the leadership team was not on site. This included a clear on-call rota and emergency protocols.

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 felt listened to, respected and included. The provider considered people’s individual needs when planning and delivering care helping people achieve outcomes that were important to them. Care plans were tailored to people’s needs and contained information in relation to people’s protected characteristics, beliefs and preferences. We saw most of the staff team had training around equality and diversity which supported inclusive practice.

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.

Care plans were in place and were clear whether people wished to receive emergency care and reflected people’s personalised wishes for care in the future. Some staff had completed specialist end of life care training.