Kingly Terrace

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 Outstanding. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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.

The provider worked in partnership with people and, where appropriate, their relatives to understand what was important to them, including their preferences, backgrounds, and individual needs. This enabled staff to provide care that was tailored to each person.

We observed positive interactions between staff and people using the service. Staff took time to engage with people, communicated in a calm and reassuring manner, and adapted their approach to meet each person's individual preferences and needs.

Staff told us they had access to clear information about the people they supported and said any changes in people's needs were communicated promptly during handovers. This helped to ensure care remained personalised and consistent. People and their relatives also spoke positively about the care they received and told us staff knew them well and understood how they liked to be supported.

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 provider worked collaboratively with people, their relatives, and external healthcare professionals to ensure people received coordinated and continuous care. Staff described effective communication within the service and said important information was shared during daily handovers, helping to ensure people's changing needs were recognised and responded to consistently.

People experienced continuity of care as staff worked together and with external professionals to support their ongoing health and wellbeing. Where people's needs changed, appropriate action was taken to ensure they continued to receive the support they required, helping to minimise disruption and maintain consistent care.Staff understood the importance of following professional advice and used this to support people’s health and wellbeing.

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

The provider shared clear and up-to-date information in ways people could understand. Staff knew people’s communication needs well and adapted how they spoke and supported them so everyone could be involved.

The manager told us information could be provided in accessible formats where needed to meet people's communication needs. During the assessment, we observed staff adapting the way they communicated to meet people's individual needs. Staff used simple language, offered reassurance and gave people time to respond, helping people living with dementia to understand information and make everyday choices.

People’s communication needs were clearly recorded in their care plans, with guidance for staff on how best to support them.People had access to mobile phones and tablets to stay in touch with family and friends. Staff had received data protection training and were careful not to discuss personal information in shared areas.

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 provider 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.

One relative told us, "I am fully involved in (relative's) care and aware of their care plan. They keep me well informed about (relative's) care and any updates."

Records showed that people knew how to raise concerns or make a complaint. We reviewed complaints records and found that concerns had been investigated and responded to in line with the provider's complaints policy and procedure. We also saw evidence of regular residents' meetings, providing people with opportunities to share their views, discuss any concerns, and contribute to the development of the service.

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

During the assessment, we did not identify any concerns about people’s ability to access the service. The registered manager and staff understood the importance of equal access to care and worked to remove barriers.The environment supported accessibility. The home had clear signage, and all areas, including the garden, were wheelchair accessible. This helped people move around safely and maintain their 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. Staff had received training in equality, diversity and human rights. Staff and leaders made sure that all residents were treated fairly and equally, no matter their background or personal needs.

People told us they were treated fairly and with respect and did not feel discriminated against. Care plans included what was important to each person, such as their relationships, interests, cultural background and spiritual needs. This helped make sure people received fair and personalised care.

Staff understood the importance of treating people as individuals. We observed staff treating people as individuals and respecting their personal preferences and choices. The manager told us support would be available for people to practise their faith where this formed part of their wishes, although this was not required by anyone using the service at the time of our assessment.

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.

The provider encouraged individuals to share their end-of-life wishes and viewed this as a positive contribution to people’s care planning. Care plans were detailed and respectful of peoples wishes.

Important information was included such as who to contact, whether the person wished to be admitted to hospital and if the person wanted medical intervention. This ensured staff respected the person’s end of life wishes.

Where people had Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions in place, these were clearly documented within their care records and were easily accessible to staff to help ensure care was provided in line with people's wishes.

At the time of our inspection, no one was receiving end-of-life care.