Manor View 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 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 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 was person-centred. Members of staff were caring and interacted with people well. We saw evidence in people’s care plans regarding their life history. Members of staff checked if people were feeling ok and if they had access to everything they required. We spent time talking to people and they showed us their rooms. One person’s room was decorated how they wanted it with pictures and personal items including several flags on the wall. There was a plentiful supply of drinks and snacks in their room.

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’s needs were clearly identified in their care plans and there were good links with local community health and care services.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats which were tailored to individual needs. We observed the inspection rating displayed in the main reception area was not from the last inspection carried out in 2024, therefore the incorrect information was displayed.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Relatives knew who to contact if they needed to make a complaint about the service. A family member told us, “We have not formally complained but we have made the manager aware of how we feel – nicely of course. They have a lot on their chest about what is going on there. We keep giving them the benefit of doubt.” Another relative told us they knew how to raise concerns, “I would complain if I had something to complain about but I have had to put them in the picture about some things.”

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The service worked in partnership with other local health and care services to ensure people’s needs were met.

Staff and leaders did not always actively listen to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. Feedback from family members was mixed. One relative told us, “When [family member] had a fall, [the provider] put a new [care plan] together. The physio was there a couple of times and the nurse helped move [family member’s] legs and chased the delivery of their chair. I was told [the provider] had updated [the care plan].” But another relative told us, “I wasn’t involved in writing [the care plan] but I know I can look at it when I visit – but I haven’t as yet. [The provider] didn’t know it was [family member’s] birthday the other week so they did nothing for them – so I don’t think they look at their records either.”

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’s end of life care wishes were recorded in their care plans and it was evident they had been involved in discussions about what they wanted to happen at the end of their life.