Manton Heights Care Centre Also known as Ranc Care Homes Limited

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 placed people at the centre of their care and treatment. Staff worked in partnership with people to respond to changes in their needs. They involved people in planning and ensured care reflected their needs, preferences and wishes. Staff explained options in a way people could understand, which helped them feel informed and in control.

Staff worked with people and those close to them when needs changed. They reviewed care plans and adjusted support to make sure it continued to meet people’s needs. Most people and relatives said they were involved in decisions and kept informed about changes.

Care plans included information about people’s physical, emotional and social needs, and staff used these to guide person‑centred care. They supported people to take part in decisions as much as possible and involved family members or representatives when appropriate. A relative said, “I helped devise the care plan and it is updated as [relative’s] needs change.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local community. Staff provided care that was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. They understood people’s needs well and adapted support when needs changed. Staff sought extra help when needed.

Staff worked well with families, carers and other services to make sure care was joined‑up. They shared information so people received consistent support and did not have to repeat themselves. People were mostly supported by familiar staff, which helped provide continuity.

Managers and staff worked closely with other professionals to make sure people received the care they were entitled to. People and relatives said the service understood their needs and worked well with others to support them.

People received information that was accurate, up to date and easy to understand. Staff understood people’s communication needs and adapted how they shared information to suit each person. They used simple language or other formats where needed. Care plans recorded how people preferred to communicate. Staff used this information to help people stay informed and involved in their care.

For people whose first language was not English, some information and signage were available in their preferred language. Staff also spoke a range of languages, which helped improve communication and engagement. Staff used practical approaches to support choice and understanding. For example, at mealtimes, they showed plated meal options so people could see and choose what they wanted.

Staff understood the importance of confidentiality and handled personal information appropriately. Information was shared securely and only with those who needed to know, in line with data protection requirements.

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 said they felt confident to share their views and raise concerns where needed. Managers investigated complaints and shared outcomes, including any actions taken to improve the service.

People were involved in decisions about their care and support. Staff listened to their views and used feedback to make improvements. A person said, “I asked for a shelf for my books and they put it up.”

The service held regular meetings for residents and relatives, as well as satisfaction surveys to gather feedback. A relative said, “They have questionnaires and residents ‘meetings, they have a group once a month for relatives.” Overall, most people felt listened to and confident their views made a difference.

People could get the care and support they needed when they needed it. Staff were flexible and changed support to suit each person. They understood people’s needs and made changes to help them access care more easily. Staff helped people attend appointments and acted quickly when needs changed.

The building was easy to use and helped people stay safe and independent. Staff worked with families and other professionals to make sure support ran smoothly. Staff treated people fairly and understood their rights. They noticed when something made access harder and took action to fix it. People said they could get help when they needed it and trusted staff to respond.

Staff and leaders listened to information about people who may be at risk of inequality. They used this information to adjust care and improve outcomes. Staff understood equality, diversity and inclusion. They acted to address issues and promote an inclusive culture.

Staff knew people well and understood how their backgrounds, needs and protected characteristics could affect their experiences. They used this knowledge to adapt care and make reasonable adjustments. This helped people access support in a way that suited them. For example, where people had dietary needs in relation to their cultural, spiritual or ethical beliefs, this was provided.

Staff treated people with respect and promoted their rights in daily practice. They supported people to express their views and ensured these were considered when planning care. People said they felt valued, listened to and treated fairly, and the service worked to provide positive and inclusive experiences for everyone. A person said, “The staff provide care which is encouraging and respectful. They have an understanding of people and treat me like a human being.”

Staff supported people to plan for important life changes. This included giving people time to make informed decisions about their future, including end‑of‑life care. Staff spoke with people about what mattered to them and provided clear information to support choice.

Staff encouraged people to share their preferences while they had capacity and involved families or advocates where people wanted this. Staff recorded decisions, including Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) or Recommended for Emergency Care and Treatment plans (ReSPECT), and reviewed these when needed. The manager understood how to approach sensitive conversations and respected when people or their relatives did not wish to discuss these issues.

Care plans reflected people’s wishes and were updated as needs changed. Staff recognised when people’s health was changing and responded to ensure care remained compassionate and dignified.