Elwick Grange

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.

Staff knew people very well and demonstrated this through the way care was delivered. Staff were able to describe people’s individual needs, preferences, and routines, and gave clear examples of the specific actions they took to support each person in a personalised way.

Care plans were person centred and developed around people’s needs. These clearly outlined how people wished to be supported. Staff had obtained comprehensive life history information for each person, enabling them to deliver support that was informed, personalised and sensitive to the person’s background.

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.

The service worked with commissioners to ensure that continuity of care was managed. Staff worked with a range of health and social care professionals to ensure people received constant joined - up care. Appropriate and timely referrals were made to health care professionals.A healthcare professional told us, “They support transitions very well, ensuring safety is maintained at all times.”

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

The registered manager ensured people received information in the format they needed, including specialist equipment, Braille, large print or translation.

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, relatives, and staff were encouraged to give feedback about the service. Surveys were conducted annually and resident meetings were regularly held.A relative told us, “[Name] the manager is fantastic, very approachable.… they take time to listen.”

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

Staff supported people to access care, treatment and support in a way that worked for them. A healthcare professional told us, “[Staff] monitor their residents very closely and seek advice immediately if any changes noted to their presentation. Due to complex patient needs they work closely with a number of community services such as Community Matrons, District Nurses and Virtual Frailty Ward.”

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 provider promoted and protected people’s human rights. Staff had completed equality and diversity training and used this knowledge to advocate for people, ensuring they experienced fair and non‑discriminatory care.

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 given appropriate opportunities to talk about their wishes for end‑of‑life care. When people opted to share their choices, staff recorded them within detailed, personalised plans to ensure their preferences were respected.