The Amwell

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 requires improvement. 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 and the management team had made changes and improvements throughout the care home which resulted in a more person-centred approach to care and support.People’s care plans contained information personalised to the care and support needs and preferences of each person. Staff knew people well and we observed staff interacting with people in a supportive and compassionate way. One person told us, “The staff are very kind and helpful.” Another said, “I like my room, I have all my football pictures up.”

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.

People’s care plans described their healthcare needs and how to meet these. Some people using the service had complex needs. We saw their care plans were detailed and personalised. There were clear instructions for staff to follow, so they understood each person’s condition and how it impacted on their daily lives.

External professionals told us communication with the provider continued to improve over recent months and that most of their recommendations had been followed. They also acknowledged there were further improvements still required. One external professional told us, “I have observed a remarkable difference, compared to my previous experience with the previous manager. I can say [registered manager] is committed to ensuring recommendations made following any investigations, are carried out.”

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

Information and communication plans were in line with the Accessible Information Standards. These standards state that providers of publicly funded adult social care are legally obliged to ensure people with disabilities or sensory loss receive information they can understand, with the right communication support.

People’s care records contained information regarding the support they needed to communicate and how choices should be offered. Information displayed in the home was clear, easy to read and used pictures where applicable, for example food menus and how to raise concerns.

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 relatives told us they were able to raise any concerns or complaints to the staff team and felt comfortable to do so.One relative said, “We have monthly relatives’ meetings with [registered manager] and family members can ask anything and they’ll show us anything, they’re a completely open book so we’re very pleased with that.”

Policies and procedures were in place for managing and responding to complaints in a timely and appropriate manner. These policies were also readily available in easy read formats displayed in communal areas to ensure people knew how to raise a complaint or concern.

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

Reasonable adjustments had been made to ensure people were enabled to have access to all parts of the service. We saw people had access to adapted bathrooms, with a choice of bathing facilities to meet individual needs. There was lift access for people to get to different areas in the home. We saw staff had access to a variety of equipment which they used to support the needs of people living at the home. This was clearly documented in peoples care plans and staff were aware of how to support people safely.

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.

Improvements had been made to the delivery of care and support, with care increasingly tailored to people’s individual needs. The management team had actively supported changes to strengthen person-centred care, and work was ongoing to ensure these improvements were sustained, embedded in practice and used to drive continuous improvement 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. However, this was not always a subject people, or their relatives were willing to discuss, and this was approached sensitively by the management team and the care team.

People were supported to think about their future care in a way that suited them. Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) plans were included in people’s care records to reflect their preferences at such a time when they would be unable to express their wishes.