Archived: Alternative House Care Home Blackburn

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 services were organised so that they met people’s needs. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

Relatives told us communication with the management team was good. They were able to raise any issues or concerns with the manager. They said these would be addressed straight away. People and relatives were also positive about the care and support they received. Staff knew people’s needs and how to care and support them. People and relatives had been involved in agreeing people’s care and support when they moved to the home and were kept up to date with any changing needs.

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 received personalised care which met their needs and reflected their preferences. They told us they were happy with their care.

We spoke to staff who said they were aware of people’s needs and kept up to date if any changes in care occurred.

We observed staff were confident, communicated effectively and provided effective support to people. Staff showed a good understanding on how to support people living at Alternative House Care Home, adapting their interactions to suit people’s communication preferences.

People told us that health professionals were involved in their care if they were needed, this included professionals regularly visiting the home.

Staff and management team knew who to contact to make sure people received the right support.

Health professionals told us the home was very welcoming to receiving feedback to improve the quality of care.

A health professional contacted the home regularly to monitor people's health and wellbeing. Management liaised with other healthcare professionals to help make sure people had joined up care and received the clinical and emotional support they required.

We observed staff communicating with people in a way that they understood. One relative told us, “[Family member] wasn’t well a few weeks ago. I phoned [carer], he chatted with me, he gave me the time.”

Staff were able to share information that was accurate and up to date. The manager was very knowledgeable on people’s support needs. However, current staff training records were not provided during this assessment.

Care plan guidance was provided by the manager to help staff to effectively communicate with people that ensured the person’s needs were met.

People and their families knew how to give feedback about their experiences of care and support including how to raise any concerns or issues. Relatives felt confident that if they complained, they would be taken seriously by the manager and treated compassionately. Not all relatives felt supported by the provider.

Staff spoke very positively about the provider told us they felt any complaints would be explored thoroughly.

The provider had a complaints policy. The manager or deputy manager were available daily to respond to concerns. One relative told us they were unhappy with the response they had received when they had complained to the provider, as it failed to address their concerns.

People were able to access care, treatment and support when they needed to without delay. We observed staff promoted people’s rights to access medical treatment within Alternative House Care Home when health professionals visited the home.

Feedback from relatives indicated the provider was supporting people’s rights to equity in accessing services.

Staff showed they understood people had a right to receive the care and support that met their specific individual needs. We observed staff treated people equally, without discrimination and respected their individual needs, promoting their cultural needs.

The manager showed evidence that everyone could access physical and emotional care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Feedback from a visiting health professional was positive saying the manager supported people to access medical services when they needed them.

Management made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Managers had good working relationships with local health professionals and knew how to contact the appropriate teams to support people when the need arose.

People told us they had access to health professionals and staff reminded them when appointments were due or supported them to the appointments.

Staff understood how to care for people equally and recorded the care they provided in daily care notes. People’s unique needs and identity was recorded in their care plans. Staff told us they were given guidance on how to support each person’s needs and wellbeing.

Health professionals were provided with the necessary information and support from staff who knew people well. This promoted equality, removed barriers or delays and protected their rights.

People and their representatives were involved in important changes to their life, including decisions about their end of life care.

The management team had a process in place to record people’s decisions about their future end-of-life care including decisions around resuscitation. However, staff had not received formal end-of-life care training to support compassionate and respectful support. The manager told us they would investigate available training.

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.