Apple Blossom Court

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. Care plans were person centred and included information about people’s needs and preferences. Staff understood people and meaningful relationships had been formed with them and their family members. We observed positive interactions between staff and people throughout our assessment.

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 said they had access to a range of health and social care providers when needed. Healthcare professionals commented on the positive partnership working they had with the service. People had access to advocacy services who could support them with making decisions about their care.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Information about the service was available in alternative formats including picture formats. Accessible information was available to inform people of their rights to make a complaint or contact other agencies if they were unhappy with their care. Advocacy services were utilised when needed to support people to understand information about their care.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Regular meetings were held with people to enable this. Staff involved people in decisions about their care. A complaints policy was in place and information on how to make a complaint was clearly visible. All concerns and complaints had been taken seriously investigated and appropriately addressed. People knew how to raise a complaint. A family member commented, “I have no complaints. I have full confidence in [Registered manager’s name] and the staff. [Registered manager’s name] is genuine and really cares.”

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Partners who worked with the provider told us people received care when they needed it. Records were maintained when people accessed support from other services. Where appropriate, important contact details were contained within care plans.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. For example, people who were at the most risk of inequality in experience or outcomes, information about their individual care and support needs was recorded.People and their family members were positive about the care provided from the staff team. Staff encouraged people to engage at their own pace in activities within the service which encouraged participation and reduced the risk of experiencing social isolation. One staff member told us, “People help out with cooking. Today we have ‘around the world’ day. The service users have been involved. Some really like to join in especially [Name] and [Name].”

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. Some people had shared details about their plans for the future. This included end of life care wishes and whether they had chosen to have do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) order in place. These wishes and arrangements were clearly documented.