Garden Hill Care Centre

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 included person-centred information about what mattered to people, including how staff should communicate with them. People told us staff involved them in decisions about their care and tried to meet their needs.

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. Information regarding any changes to people’s care or support needs was shared with staff teams during handover meetings between shifts. The service worked with other health professionals involved in people’s care. Families and residents were consulted about the care they received. People and their relatives could raise any issues they had in meetings, and the provider asked them to complete surveys to give feedback.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats tailored to individual needs. Information was displayed appropriately throughout the care home. Menus were available in written and picture formats so people could make informed choices about what they wanted to eat at mealtimes.

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 their relatives were listened to and involved in decisions about their care. There were opportunities for people and their relatives to share feedback, including through meetings, conversations with staff or in writing. Information on how to do this was displayed on the wall of the communal lounge.

People’s views were used this to inform care and improve the service.

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

People were supported to access healthcare professionals, including GPs, nurses and specialist services. Staff understood the importance of adapting support, for example, following a lift breakdown in the home a contingency plan was put into place which ensured people could still access communal areas. Relatives and staff told us people could access activities and adjustments were made if necessary to support inclusion.

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 said they had positive experiences living at the home. They told us staff met their dietary needs and encouraged them to stay active to support their mobility.

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 had end-of-life care plans in place which contained details of what they wanted to happen in the event of their death. We saw evidence of family involvement in discussion about care and support at the end of people’s lives.