Farmhouse Residential Rest Home

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 71 (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 had care plans which had been developed with them and their loved ones when appropriate. The plans were regularly reviewed and kept up to date. Relatives we spoke with told us they were involved in reviewing the care plans. Care plans included information about people and their personal preferences. We saw one person’s plan stated, they preferred female carers and another described how they didn’t like red meat.

People had access to a range of activities which included the occasional trip out into the community for a coffee and cake or fish and chips, which people told us they enjoyed.

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 worked collaboratively and effectively with a range of health and social care professionals. These professionals visited the home regularly to review, discuss, and respond to people’s care needs and requests. We saw timely referrals were made to relevant professionals, including speech and language therapists, occupational therapists, GPs, and the falls team, when changes in people’s needs were identified.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Although we saw some effort had been made to give people information about their care and support such as dementia friendly paintwork more could be offered. For example, we saw written menus on the dining table with 2 weeks’ worth of meals recorded in the written form. Some people may have found a simpler form of communication more useful such as in pictorial form.

We did not see any ‘easy read’ document around the service and there was limited evidence to support that the provider was meeting the ‘Accessible information standard’ within the service. Following the inspection, the nominated individual sent us an action plan stating how they would be looking into simplifying the menus for people.

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.

There was a suggestion box in the hallway for people, staff and visitors to add suggestions for improvements.

The activities coordinator told us there were regular meetings for people using the service and their relatives. One person told us, “I go to meetings. We talk about what’s going on in the home.” A relative told us, “If we cannot get to the meeting, minutes are sent out to us via email.”

The dining room was in the process of being redecorated and people and their relatives had been involved in choosing the colour scheme through a voting system. There was a planned painting party to complete the decorating.

The provider had a complaint procedure; which was available in the hallway. Complaints were managed in line with the procedure, and people and their relatives were kept informed of the outcome. Lessons were learned and improvements were made when shortfalls were identified.

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

The provider had supported several people to have advocates. An advocate is a person who supports someone to understand their rights, express their views, and make informed decisions, especially when they may find it difficult to speak up for themselves. This demonstrated that the provider was ensuring everyone had the opportunity to be heard and be listened to.

Staff understood people’s individual needs and any potential access difficulties. They worked with people to remove these barriers, and no issues were reported in accessing care or local services.

The premises were accessible, with equipment in place to support mobility and independence.

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.

Care plans reflected people’s individual needs and outlined any reasonable adjustments needed to support equal access and experience. Most people said they were treated fairly and staff listened and responded to their concerns. Where one person had concerns, we discussed this with the nominated individual who sent us a comprehensive action plan outlining how they were going to support this person with their expected outcomes.

Staff knew how to advocate for people facing inequality and took action to ensure people felt valued, included, and supported within the service and the wider community.

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 had end of life plans in place which recorded what their wishes were for that time of their life. People were supported to express their preferences, including decisions about resuscitation, and these were clearly recorded and shared with relevant staff. ReSPECT forms were also in place. A ReSPECT form is a written plan that explains a person’s wishes for their care in an emergency if they are unable to speak for themselves. It records agreed decisions with healthcare professionals, such as whether resuscitation should be provided, and is used across different healthcare settings.