Fulford Care & Nursing 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 71 (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 ensured people were placed at the centre of their care and treatment. Staff worked in partnership with people to respond to changes in their needs, ensuring care remained responsive and personalised. People received care and support that promoted their physical and mental wellbeing and enhanced their quality of life. Care plans were person-centred and provided clear guidance on how people wished to be supported. People told us they were consulted about their care needs and preferences. A person said, “I’ve got one. I didn’t write it, but I know what’s in it.”

People spoke positively about the range of activities available, which supported social engagement, sensory experiences, and enjoyment. During the inspection, activities included live singers, crafts, and opportunities to interact with animals such as baby lambs and newly hatched chicks. People told us they were encouraged to share ideas for activities. One person said, “You can never get bored here, there is always something to see or do.” A relative commented their loved one, “Looks forward to them and they’re a reason for her to get up in the mornings and get dressed up.”

The provider understood people’s diverse health and care needs and worked with other services to support joined up, flexible care and continuity. Care records showed regular involvement from health and community partners including GP and community nursing. Referrals were made appropriately and professional advice was reflected in care plans. People’s needs were assessed following significant changes in their health and well-being and care plans updated.

People were supported to maintain their interests, and links with the community. For example, one person told us they had access to weekly holy communion, which was important to them. Another person said they enjoyed community-based activities and was looking forward to a planned trip to a lambing farm.

The provider ensured information was provided in formats people could understand. Processes in place followed the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The standard was introduced to make sure people are given information in a way they can understand. There was some signage to support people with dementia navigate their environment and this was being developed further. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s individual communication needs. They told us people used written and spoken English. Where required they used additional resources such as pictorial prompts and different text sizes to support peoples understanding. Systems and processes in place ensured people’s communication needs were known and met.

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. Staff told us they sought people’s opinions and ideas through general conversations, resident meetings, and discussions.

People, their relatives and staff had opportunities to participate in meetings and surveys about the running of the care home. As a direct result of a recent survey on the quality of meals, the registered manager worked with people and the chef to develop a menu that reflected people’s preferences and supported a balanced diet.

‘You said we did’ posters were displayed around the building. These provided clear accounts of how people’s feedback had shaped service improvements. For example, in response to resident’s feedback in February 2026, some areas of the home had received new furniture and furnishings, improvements were being made in the garden to include more seating and a water feature, and a new and comprehensive activities calendar had been implemented.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support, and treatment they needed when they needed it. People told us they were supported to attend routine and specialist medical appointments. A relative said,” I take [name] and at other times they take her or organise hospital transport. ‘Records were kept about these appointments.

Staff were knowledgeable about the signs to indicate a person’s health may be deteriorating and care records reflected staff had sought appropriate medical advice. We observed a telephone call between a nurse and the GP practice. The nurse clearly described the reason for the call and request for medicines which were prescribed.

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. Staff had received training in equality and diversity and knew how to support people in a way that took account of their individuality, abilities, and lifestyle choices. Staff had an awareness of discrimination and inequality and how to address this. Processes ensured people’s care promoted equality and protects their rights.

People were not consistently supported to plan for significant life changes in a timely and meaningful way, which limited their ability to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. Prior to and during the inspection, families shared experiences indicating that end-of-life care was not always delivered in a person-centred way. These concerns were reflected in care records, which showed gaps in end-of-life planning. This meant there was a risk that people’s preferences, wishes, and individual needs were not fully understood or consistently respected.

A relative shared a positive example of the end of life care their relative had received and how the staff had supported the whole family. The service worked in partnership with the local hospice and end of life care hub (ECHO) which provided support to people nearing end of life. Some people had chosen not to discuss their end of life wishes at the present time, but processes were in place for this, should they change their mind. Information was in place for each person for what to do in an emergency medical situation, should this be required.