Ocknell Park

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 service 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 service 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 received person centred care, they told us staff were there when they needed them.

Staff were confident in their approach with people; they had enough information about people to provide safe and person-centred care. We observed people and staff interacting in individual ways. A staff member told us, “We do have an activities planner, but we rarely stick to it, as it changes on the day depending on what people want to do. We also check in and ask them daily what they want to do.”

People had access to a wide range of activities and hobbies, this included within the service and outside. People were supported to access their local area where possible and had included day trips out which had been enjoyed by all. Records demonstrated a person-centred approach through all care plans and risk assessments.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People told us they had access to the care they needed, their relatives confirmed the same. Staff told us they routinely contacted professionals to support people such as, GPs and therapists, this had varied dependent on the person’s needs. Records showed input from a variety of health and social care professionals; the interactions were positive and consistent. Information was shared through telephone calls, emails and meetings.

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

People and their relatives told us information about care and support was available to them. We were assured this service met the requirements of the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The AIS is a law to make sure that people who have a disability, impairment or sensory loss receive information they can easily read or understand. Staff adapted to meet people’s individual communication needs, for example, providing documentation and information in different formats such as in pictorial form or large print.

The service did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. There was not always evidence people were told what had changed as a result of their feedback.

The service had complaints process however, records showed concerns had not always been dealt with in accordance with the service policies and procedures.

People confirmed the staff held a monthly resident meeting and said when they asked for things the staff made sure these were put in place. However, meeting records did not always reflect actions taken. The provider could not be assured people’s concerns or suggestions had been listened to, or the service continuously made improvements following feedback from people using the service.

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

People and their relatives were assured care and support needs were met. Communication and clear documentation meant people could transition through different services and this had supported continuity in care. Staff told us they had enough information for people to receive safe care.

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 told us the service appreciated diversity and celebrated different cultures. Staff were supported by the management of the service and their colleagues. Care and support plans detailed people’s unique differences, this meant they were at the forefront of the service provided to them. Staff had undertaken equality and diversity training, and this was considered throughout all the policies and procedures within the service.

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 and their relatives had been involved in planning for the future; everyone was given the opportunity to discuss their hopes and wishes. People had individual care plans for their future wishes which had included where and how they wanted to receive care in their last days. Staff told us they understood people’s specific needs and thought the information provided to them was of an accessible standard.