Hepworth House

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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. For example, people’s care plans contained information about their likes and dislikes including those related to hobbies and pastimes. There was evidence people and their relatives had been involved in their care planning as much as possible. Where people wanted and were able to, they had personalised their bedrooms, for example with pictures of their loved ones. A person told us, “I am happy living here.”

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. For example, a person’s care plan contained relevant information on their skin and hair care requirements reflecting their cultural backgrounds. A staff member told us, “It is always lovely to hear their stories directly from them and then link it the info on their care plans.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. For example, people were supported to make choices about what they ate with an electronic visual menu. Visual aids were used to support communication with a person where they were known to experience distress when receiving care. Staff spoke to us about the importance of observing people’s body language and/or gestures to meet and anticipate their needs when they could not verbally communicate their wishes.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. For example, there were systems in place to seek feedback from people and their relatives via annual surveys. The provider’s signing in system also captured feedback from visitors in which to act upon. A staff member told us, “It’s making sure it's all about the residents and their choice and respecting that.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff had consistently contacted medical professionals for advice and guidance when this was required, for example, in relation to head injuries and emotional distress.

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. For example, since our last inspection the service had reviewed where people’s bedrooms were, where they were supported and encouraged to spend time, this allowed for better therapeutic benefits to all people at Hepworth House.

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. There was evidence people and their relatives had been consulted with about their wishes at the end of their lives.