Parklands Care 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 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’s care was personalised and staff provided support in a person-centred way. They spent time with people to learn their likes and dislikes and were responsive to changes in people’s health. Care plans were written respectfully and described people’s needs. However, some areas of the care plans would benefit from expanding further. For example, people’s emotional care plans were brief in detail. The service had recently implemented a new electronic record system which meant some areas of the records we still under development. The registered manager had already identified this and was working to add further detail within the records, drawing upon staff knowledge to ensure a person-centred approach.

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 service worked well with partners and were able to source additional support when people’s needs changed. Managers and staff had a good understanding of how to support people with dementia and provided training in this area to reflect the diverse needs of the people. Family members told us there was continuity of care with the staff team. One relative said, “As the care home is so small and the staff have been there so long then they know everyone so well.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.The service provided information to people and their families in ways that were accessible to them. People’s communication methods were reviewed and recorded so they could be involved in their care. Families kept up to date with the service and their relatives through visits, phone calls and social media. Families told us the staff were responsive to any changes in their relatives and would contact them without delay with updates regarding their care and health. One family member said, “I know that I'd get a phone call if there was anything wrong and all the staff are brilliant.”

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.People and staff were given the opportunity to feedback about the service through resident meetings, flash meetings and supervisions which took place on a regular basis. The minutes for these meetings could be improved to ensure discussion areas and people’s input were clearly evidenced. However, people had been involved with making decisions about the service. Families had the opportunity to give feedback through forms on display in the communal areas. Although they said they had not been invited to a formal relative meeting, they told us they were happy to approach the registered manager at any time. One family member said, “No there aren't any relative’s meetings but if there is anything that I need to talk to them about I will just knock on the door and speak to either [the registered manger] or [the administrator] and they get things sorted.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. There were no barriers to people accessing the service or their care and support. People could access medical advice quickly and regular GP support ensured people had access to the supporting services they required. The service had made adaptions to the environment to ensure people with varying mobility had access to the areas they needed and equal opportunity to take part in activities and events.

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 staff had undertaken equality and diversity training. Staff, people and family members did not identify any concerns about discrimination.

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’s wishes, if they were able to make them, and those of their relatives, where appropriate, were recorded and met. People were supported at the end of their life by staff who had been trained to do so, and who knew them well.