Crimson Manor

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 service met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.

This service scored 50 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. People were involved in initial care plans, but we found no evidence they were involved in further updates and reviews of information to care plans.

There were some shortfalls in how the service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was not always joined-up, flexible or supportive of choice and continuity. We received feedback from partners involved with people living in the service and they expressed concerns of the involvement and engagement of the service. They provided examples of when the service had not responded to requests for meetings, they told us they were not always made to feel welcome or felt advice was not always listened to or acted upon by staff. For example, two people’s care plans had dietary advice from professionals with regard to managing health related issues. We found the advice from professionals was not followed and due to a lack of detailed recording from staff it was unclear whether this was due to staff not following care plans or people making choices not to follow advice.

The service did not consistently supply appropriate information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. They did not have easy read documents, and we saw no information displayed at the service for people regarding making compliments or complaints and no safeguarding information shared with people living at the service. The registered told us that easy read documentation could be provided if people asked for it. We were not assured by this, as some people at the service had advanced dementia and may not be able to request information in alternative formats.

We found a lack of information that people living at the service was encouraged and provided support to complete the most recent residents survey. The service provided information on their resident’s survey from February 2024. Only 8 out of the 17 people living at the service was recorded to have been able to complete the feedback with support of staff in a meaningful way.

We found people had inconsistent access to support they required. They could access GP, district nurses and chiropodists. However, not everyone had access to a hairdresser. This meant that people who could not mobilise and did not have the funds to finance this service were left without basic access to their hair being cut. The service had not assessed how they could ensure people’s hairdressing needs could be otherwise met.

Staff and leaders did not always provide people with opportunities to feedback to allow service to actively listen to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. Lack of recorded support from staff to encourage all people using the service to complete the people survey in a meaningful way. Staff had received equality and diversity, work in a person centred way and communication training.

We found the service did not always record the most up to date needs of people living at the service. For example, a person had a recent hospital stay on discharge from hospital and on return to the service the person’s health had deteriorated. We observed staff providing support that was not as described as support required within their care plans - even though the care plans had been reviewed following their discharge from hospital. However, all care plans had information recorded on end of life and the service told us they provided support to people living at the service until end of life with support from palliative care services and district nurses as well as other partners.