Amathea

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.

All care plans we looked at were detailed and updated regularly by staff. The care plans contained information regarding appropriate means of communication and how best to support a person with their care needs.

Care plans were reviewed every 6 months or sooner if required. People and their families could choose to be involved in the reviews.

One person told us, “I do the care plan review, we have to do that every so often and they do come and ask if things are alright.”

A family member told us, “We do the care plan and reviews, and they let us know if she is poorly.” Another told us, “We do the care reviews, but we live away so we speak to them a lot, they always let us know what is going on, I cannot fault them.”

Families were kept up to date and informed of any changes with their relative’s health and care needs. A family member told us, “The staff let us know about everything, even if [relative] is just unsettled and they are very quick if he is unwell and such.”

Visiting professionals told us they found staff to be knowledgeable and informative when attending reviews. One professional told us, “When I’ve met with staff for review, feedback has been consistent, and they have shown a good understanding of the resident’s 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.

People received the full care they required, and a stable staff team allowed for continuity of care to be provided.

People were offered choice in relation to the gender of their carers and senior management acted on feedback received from people if this was not appropriate for them.

People were offered opportunities to participate in the providers 'peoples panel' allowing them to be part of discussions and information sharing around any changes and updates to the home.

We received positive feedback from other professionals regarding working together. One professional told us, “My working relationship with staff and management has always been a positive experience. They are good at keeping in contact with us when needed and providing honest feedback regarding their experience, which helps to maintain relations.”

We found staff training and induction records enabled staff to develop their understanding of the needs of the people they worked with.

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

Peoples care plan information was securely held on the homes IT computer system, and people’s communication needs were clearly identified and recorded within this.

Information was readily available to people, their families and visitors to the home. Large notice boards were in the corridors with explanations such as, “Why we wake you up to take your medicines,” and “Giving consent.”

There were also notice boards with reminders for people, for example - how to speak to people with dementia, standards of care expected, skin care, and hydration. There was a notice board with ‘meet the care team’ with photographs, names and roles of all the staff members.

Families told us that they felt they received information as and when appropriate. A family member told us, “We get all the information, I rely on them to communicate with us and they do.”

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 families told us they felt listened to by staff and the management team. One family member told us, “Anything we have asked them to do they have done; they have been absolutely marvellous.”

A large information board in the corridor contained information around “You said, we did” which outlined how feedback from people and families had been addressed by the home.

We found evidence of people and their relatives’ meetings where feedback was actively sought and responded to. For example, discussion around whether or not to have a buffet on a Sunday lunchtime.

We noted a complaints policy was available, and people told us they would feel comfortable in raising any concerns with either staff or the management team and were confident that actions would be taken where appropriate.

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

Staff ensured that care was accessible to all. Staff supported people to ensure their communication needs were met in appropriate ways, for example by understanding nods, head movements and non-verbal gestures.

Staff were able to access support at any time through the use of an out of hours rota.

The building and environment were accessible to all and was supportive to people living with dementia through use of appropriate signage, individualised doors and the use of pictures for menu planning. Dementia Keys were available for people, these included picture references to important aspects of their lives. These could be used by families or staff to promote discussion and support with memories.

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.

Care plans reflected reasonable adjustments for people in terms of aids and equipment they needed. We found evidence of these needs being reviewed and new aids being requested when changes were required.

Staff undertook Equality, Diversity and Inclusion training as part of their mandatory training to help them understand equality and address discrimination. Staff also undertook “Crossing the line training,” which discusses equality, diversity and expected behaviours and sensitivities. The training also involves staff discussing different scenarios, for example working with differing communities and cultures.

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 were supported to ensure any end-of-life wishes were recorded within their care plans. Where appropriate peoples Do Not Attempt Cardiac Pulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) and advanced wishes were also clearly recorded.

Staff were supported in their understanding of end-of-life care by participating in ‘The Last Lap’ training. This relates to sessions offered by the chaplain to support staff through their understanding and care of people, and their families during this time.

Families told us they felt included and supported during end-of-life care. A family member told us, “When they thought [relative] was end of life we came and sat all the time and they kept us informed about everything.”