Archived: Northcott House Residential Care and Nursing Home Also known as 1-684385445

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.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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. We saw people living with dementia had memory boxes, which could be used by people, their relatives and staff to provide stimulation and interest.

We observed staff knew people well. There was a well maintained, secure garden which people were able to access in the warmer weather. People were able to access the community; there was a trip out to a garden centre for afternoon tea on the second day of our inspection. Staff and the management team told us how they worked in partnership with other professionals to ensure people received joined-up care. For example, input from the older people’s mental health team and the pharmacy.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Care records contained people’s individual communication styles and preferences, which were understood and applied by staff supporting them. For example, comments from staff included “[Person] has a speech difficulty, and we have picture cards which we are trying to use so we know whether [person] wants food, whether [they] are in pain for, example” and “[Person] is blind but can hear when people are in the room. When we go into their bedroom, we say ‘hello’ and [they] recognise our voices. When I’m supporting [person] or tidying [their] room, I will talk through everything I am doing, and I always leave things within reach.”

Residents and relatives’ meetings were held where they could raise topics that mattered to them and were provided with updates about the home. The service used feedback from people to make changes in the form of ’You said, we did.’ For example, following comments from people about food temperatures, the service had reviewed the way food was served, to keep food warmer. Picture menus were available in the dining room.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People's care records showed they had access to care, and that referrals were made for treatment or advice when needed. People with protected characteristics were supported to have equitable access to services. For example, people with a disability which impacted their ability to leave the home were supported to access health services to meet their individual needs.

We did not look at Equity in experiences and outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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. Although nobody at the service was receiving end of life care at the time of the assessment, people’s relatives told us staff had open conversations with them. Comments included, “I did the end-of-life care plan with [person] and the staff, and we have it all written out clearly.”

Staff told us they had completed training in end-of-life care and external healthcare professionals supported them to look after people at the end of their lives. Staff liaised with other professionals to ensure anticipatory medicines were in place when required.

The service audited end of life care plans; however, there were no actions linked to some of the gaps identified. This meant it was unclear how improvements to plans would take place. We fed this back to the registered manager who told us the audit tool would be reviewed.