- Care home
St Anne's Care Home
Assessment report published 17 February 2026
Contents
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
Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs.
This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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.
Person-centred Care
The service 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.
People’s needs were clearly described in their care plans. Daily records confirmed people were at the centre of their care and made day to day decisions about how they wanted to spend their time.
Staff told us they delivered care in line with people’s wishes. A staff member said, “I adopt a person-centred approach.”
Care provision, Integration and continuity
The service 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. Each person had a small, consistent, core staff team.This supported continuity in people’s care and treatment.
At the time of this inspection, people were not receiving input from external professionals.
Providing Information
The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.
Communication needs were assessed and detailed in people’s care plans. We observed kind interactions between a staff member and a person. The staff member ensured they spoke clearly and in line with person’s assessed communication needs.
The provider told us, if required, information could be produced in line with people’s needs, for example, in large print.
Listening to and involving people
The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.
Relatives confirmed they felt comfortable approaching the provider and knew how to raise complaints or concerns.
The service used a digital messaging platform to ensure relatives had an easy way of communicating with staff and the management team.
There service had not received any recent, formal complaints. However, a complaints process was in place, and this was supported by an up-to-date complaints policy.
Equity in access
The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.
Staff told us they understood people had the right to be treated equally and supported them to access services. Themanagement team and staff were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage different groups of people accessing care and treatment. Staff could use multiple channels to raise concerns about any discriminatory treatment.
Records viewed during the inspection confirmed people were supported to access the community.
Equity in experiences and outcomes
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.
People's care and experiences were tailored to meet their needs. People and relatives were positive about the care and support they were receiving.
Staff received equality and human rights training, and a policy was in place that promoted equality in the service.
Planning for the future
People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they would have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including towards the end of their life.
People had plans in place, which detailed their preference for care towards the end of life.People who had do not attempt resuscitation orders (DNACPR) had these clearly documented in their care records.