Adeline House Care Home

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 64 (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. Although relatives did not always feel involved in their family member’s care. Staff knew people well and understood their needs. Care plans were person centred and reflected people's needs and preferences. One relative said, “They [staff] do understand [family member] definitely.” Another relative said, “They [staff] know [family member] and if we are going to take [family member] out, the staff usually have [family member] ready for us.”

There were some shortfalls in how the provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was not always joined-up, flexible or supportive of choice and continuity. Relatives told us staff understood their family members needs but were not always sure care was delivered in line with them. Relatives were unsure whether people’s specific dietary requirements were provided, and some relatives told us personal care was not always maintained in line with people’s needs. People had access to healthcare professionals and staff understood their recommendations, although external professionals told us they did not always have confidence that staff identified healthcare concerns in a timely way.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Relative told us they did not always feel involved in their care or events within the home. We saw family meetings were arranged but not well attended. However, the manager had implemented a bi-monthly newsletter to ensure information was passed on to people and their families. Information displayed in the main entrance could be more accessible, for example the complaints procedure was underneath other documents. Information displayed was not presented in different formats to suit people living at the service. We asked relatives if their views about the service had been sought. One relative said, “I haven’t been asked.”

The provider did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff did not always involve people in decisions about their care or tell them what had changed as a result. Some relatives were not aware that their family member had a care plan. The provider had a complaints procedure to support the management team to look into concerns raised. However, this was not displayed in an easy-to-read format which would have made the process more accessible to people living at the home.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. We saw consideration had been given to signage to help people navigate around the home and to locate their bedrooms and bathrooms. People had access to outside garden areas. People were also supported to access the community.

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. The manager gave examples of success stories where they had advocated for people, so their outcomes were improved. The management team and staff were knowledgeable about different communication needs and told us some people used picture cards to assist conversation. Where people used English as a second language, they were supported to use a translation tool.

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. Documentation showed conversations had taken place with people and their relatives regarding end-of-life care. Care plans included people’s end-of-life wishes.