Archived: Clitheroe 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 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 treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

The provider ensured people’s care plans considered their physical, mental, emotional and social needs; and we observed people receiving different levels of support dependent on their individual needs. People and relatives confirmed the registered manager and staff worked with them, to make sure they were involved in planning care and making shared decisions when people’s needs changed.

People were supported to have access to individual reasonable adjustments, to ensure they received the most appropriate care and support for them. For example, some people enjoyed going out independently, so the appropriate steps were taken to enable them to do this safely. Their relative told us, “[Registered manager] does everything they can to ensure their scooter is always available for [person] to use whenever they want to go out.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of older people and those living with dementia, a physical disability or sensory impairment. Care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Staff received training in dementia care, to aid their understanding of the people they supported; and demonstrated a knowledge of older people’s care needs and associated risks.

The registered manager identified and took appropriate action when there were gaps in people’s care. They explained how they worked with the local authority or relatives, to review people’s packages of support when their needs changed. Support was offered flexibly to meet any additional, identified needs.

Whilst the home relied on agency staff to cover maternity leave, the provider minimised the impact this had on continuity of care, by using the same agency staff whenever possible.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The registered manager and staff identified, recorded and met the communication needs of people with sensory loss. Care plans included detailed information about people’s communication preferences, and staff completed training in effective communication. Staff explained the different ways they communicated with people who were non-verbal, and we observed them talking to people at their level, repeating instructions patiently to aid understanding.

The provider gave people clear and transparent information about the service, upon their move into the home. People were given a contract which included information about fees and other terms and conditions, in line with consumer rights guidance.

However, information about people was not always shared amongst staff securely. A digital messaging system was used to share personal information and important messages about changes to people’s health and care needs. Messages were automatically stored on staff members’ personal mobile phones. Following feedback, the registered manager took immediate action to ensure the appropriate encryptions and retainment periods were in place to ensure information data was more secure.

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 several systems in place to enable people and their relatives to give feedback and share ideas. People and relatives were invited to attend meetings, complete online surveys, review the service using quick response (QR) codes, or provide feedback using a suggestion box. Detailed analyses of surveys and feedback were conducted by senior managers and included proposed actions.

There was a robust complaints procedure and details of how to complain were included in people’s contracts and the service user guide. People and relatives felt confident their views were taken seriously, and confirmed the service acted upon concerns or complaints in a timely manner. A person living at the home said, “My armchair was not comfortable. I told [registered manager] and within the day he had sorted out an alternative.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The provider ensured the environment was accessible, and reasonable adjustments had been made to reduce any physical barriers to access. For example, handrails and hoists were in place, and equipment such as walking frames and adapted beds was made available.

Staff supported people to access healthcare treatment, where required. Following a previous incident, the registered manager took action to ensure people without capacity were now supported to attend healthcare appointments.

The registered manager confirmed arrangements were made to ensure managerial advice was available out of hours. A staff member resided at the home, so they were available to support the team if there was an emergency.

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 had training in equality, diversity and inclusion to support their understanding of inequality, and information about discrimination was available in the service’s equal opportunities policy. One of the provider’s values stated, ‘we celebrate and promote diversity at every level within the organisation.’

The registered manager created a culture where inequalities were challenged, and they advocated for people to ensure they were not discriminated against or disadvantaged. They told us about several occasions when they had advocated for people to ensure they had access to the appropriate levels of support, treatment or equipment. This included liaising with the local Member of Parliament (MP) on behalf of people.

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.

People were supported to make informed choices about their future care and treatment whilst they had the capacity to do so. Advanced care plans documented people’s wishes ahead of time, to ensure people could be involved as much as possible in making decisions about the end of their life. A person living at the home said, “I have put my wishes in writing and been told by [registered manager] that the home will do everything they can to carry them out.”

Staff could explain how they provided good end of life care, and confirmed the service worked closely with district nurses to ensure people received any necessary treatment.