Scorton Care Village

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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and support. Care plans reflected people's individual needs, preferences, life histories, and outcomes, providing staff with guidance on how to deliver personalised care. Records included information about people's routines, interests, relationships, cultural needs, and the support required to maintain their wellbeing and independence.
Relatives told us staff took time to understand what was important to people. One relative said, “They [staff] asked about likes and dislikes to offer him things he would eat. Every effort has been made to encourage him to eat." Care records showed support was adapted as people's needs changed, with reviews completed to ensure care continued to meet individual requirements. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people's preferences and how these should be reflected in day-to-day care.
 

The provider understood people's health and care needs and ensured care was delivered in a coordinated and consistent way. Electronic care records gave staff access to current information about people's needs, risks, and preferences, helping to ensure continuity of care across the service. Care plans and risk assessments were regularly reviewed and updated when people's needs changed, ensuring staff had access to accurate information to guide care delivery.
People and their relatives told us they received consistent support. One relative said, “[Person] is safe, the staff are very good, very attentive." Another relative told us they were kept informed about changes to their family member's care and medicines. Staff were familiar with people's needs and were able to describe how support was delivered consistently across the service.
 

The provider supplied appropriate and up-to-date information in formats tailored to people's individual needs. Information about people's communication requirements was clearly recorded and supported by an Accessible Information Standard policy, which outlined how people's information and communication needs should be identified, recorded, and met. Staff had access to guidance to help ensure information was shared in a way people could understand.
We saw examples of personalised communication support arrangements documented for staff to follow, including guidance for people who required specialist communication methods or adapted approaches. Information available to people and relatives included a service user guide covering life at the home, available services, activities, complaints procedures and contact information, helping people to make informed decisions about their care and support.
 

The provider made it easy for people and those important to them to share feedback about their care and support. Systems were in place to gather feedback through surveys, compliments, complaints and regular engagement with people and relatives. Records showed concerns and complaints were investigated, outcomes recorded and actions taken where improvements were identified. The provider also maintained records of compliments received, demonstrating a commitment to recognising and learning from people's experiences.
People and relatives told us they felt “listened to” and were “confident concerns would be acted upon.” One relative told us, "[Registered manager] is very approachable. We had a concern, and it was ironed out straight away." Another person said, “I have no complaints but if I did, I would go to the lady behind the desk." Survey results showed overall satisfaction was good from both relatives and staff, and where feedback identified opportunities for improvement, actions were recorded and monitored by the provider.
 

The provider made sure people could access the care, support, and treatment they needed when they needed it. People's individual needs were assessed, and care was adapted to help ensure they could access services safely and effectively. Care records included information about specialist equipment, communication needs, dietary requirements, and mobility support, enabling staff to make appropriate adjustments for individuals.
Staff understood the importance of providing equitable care and support. One registered nurse told us people were involved and consulted to ensure they were happy with the care provided, with adjustments made to give everyone the best opportunity to live their best lives regardless of ability. Throughout the assessment, we saw examples of people receiving support tailored to their needs, including adapted eating and drinking equipment, specialist communication aids, and individually planned care to promote safety, wellbeing, and independence.
 

Staff and leaders listened to information about people's individual needs and used this to tailor care and support. Care records reflected people's backgrounds, preferences, cultural needs, and life experiences, helping staff provide care that was meaningful and relevant to each person. People's individual strengths and abilities were recognised and incorporated into their care and support arrangements.
People were supported to maintain interests and experiences that mattered to them. One person told us, “I like living here. I like the people and I like talking to them." Another person described how they were “enjoying singing, dancing and social opportunities” within the home. We also saw examples of people being supported to pursue individual interests through activities tailored to their preferences and abilities. Activities staff described how they adapted activities across different areas of the service to help ensure people could participate in ways that suited them.
 

People were supported to plan for important life changes, including their future care and treatment. Care records included information about people's wishes and preferences for future care, including end of life care, resuscitation decisions and those important to them. We saw examples of care plans detailing people's preferred place of care, spiritual considerations, and arrangements to be followed at the end of life.
Where people lacked capacity to make decisions, care records showed involvement from family members, advocates, and healthcare professionals to support decision-making in people's best interests. Staff understood the importance of supporting people and those close to them through changes in health and wellbeing. We identified some opportunities to strengthen end of life documentation. End of life care plans were in place; however, some records would benefit from further detail regarding people's wishes, preferences, and future care arrangements to ensure staff had sufficient guidance should a person's health deteriorate. We found no evidence this had affected the care people received and the provider had recognised this as an area for continued improvement through their quality assurance systems.