Ryland 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 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.

Staff were required to document the care they provided and this could be used to provide new approaches to enable people to be better supported. Any successful strategies were added to care plans to ensure staff knew what worked best for people.

We saw evidence of care being co-produced with people and professionals wherever possible. Care was adapted to respect people’s preferences, such as support from female staff only, and to ensure people’s dignity and safety.

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.

Leaders told us that when people moved in, they assessed and identified the needs of each individual. This information would then be used to ensure that person’s support was safe and consistent.

People told us that the service communicates effectively with their families. Staff explained, “We support individuals with a range of needs. For example, one lady experiences memory difficulties, but when we play music, she recalls every word of the songs.” This demonstrates that staff have a strong understanding of the people they care for and adapt their approach to meet individual needs.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Support plans and key documents were available in easy-read versions, using pictures and symbols. The provider told us information could be translated into other languages to support people to better understand where English was not their first language. Additionally, some staff who spoke additional languages would support people directly in their preferred language. Advocates were used where needed to ensure people had independent support to understand and contribute to decisions.

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. The provider had a complaints policy in place which set out clear guidance on how to respond to complaints. People and their families were aware of how to raise concerns. Staff explained that if a person raised a complaint, this would be logged, investigated, and responded to both verbally and in writing. A copy of the provider’s complaints policy and procedure was shared as part of the process, and escalation routes were explained if the person was not satisfied with the outcome. On reviewing a sample of complaints, we found investigations had taken place.

The provider told us they sought feedback from people through surveys.

Staff told us they spoke with families when concerns were raised, which helped resolve issues collaboratively.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff completed training to give them the skills they needed to support people; they understood people’s care needs and could describe how they provided the support people needed. Support plans identified people’s needs in order to support them when accessing wider services. For example, a care plan identified a person required hearing aids and they should be used to support their communication needs. The provider also used aids such as pictures and show plates to support people in making decisions on what they might like to eat.

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. Staff used care plans to ensure people were treated with respect and dignity, regardless of their diagnosis or background.

Staff had access to support systems for those who required reasonable adjustments. For example, staff could dictate their notes and had access to occupational health should they need additional support.

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.

Staff shared they received training and could clearly explain how they met the needs of individuals in the final stages of life. Their focus was on ensuring comfort, meeting personal needs, and maintaining communication with the person’s family. One staff member expressed, “You treat them like your own family.” People we spoke with confirmed the service understood and respected their end of life wishes. Care plans included systems designed to provide personalised and equitable support when needed.