Graysford Hall

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.

People and relatives were involved in planning and making shared decisions about people’s care and support. A relative told us, “We did the care plans, and we are involved in the reviews. [Person] can have a say.” Another relative said, “We did the care plan, and we do ‘resident of the day’ [the name of the service’s review system]. We do those often.”

Care plans covered people’s physical, mental, emotional and social needs, including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. A staff member told us, “It’s easy to know people’s needs from care plans and from talking to them including people living with dementia,I still often check what they want, and that it hasn’t changed.” Another staff member said, “Care plans are very good and thorough – they are on the [electronic] system so there’s instant access to all the details.” Information in care plans helped to ensure people received person-centred care and support.

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.

People received care and treatment in line with their assessed needs. Relatives said people had regular health checks and appointments. A relative told us, “[Person] does see the GP and we have just arranged a dental appointment for [person]. [Staff] are on top of all the health appointments though, and they do check.” People’s care plans clearly set out the support they needed with their medical needs.

Staff worked closely with community health care providers and knew when to refer people for specialist care. For example, staff monitored people’s weight and used action plans to identify people who might need a referral, via their GP, to a dietician. They involved the local authority’s in-reach team to better support people living with dementia who were experiencing distress. They accessed support, advice and treatment for people from physiotherapists, district nurses, speech and language therapists, chiropodists, and opticians.

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

The service followed the principles of the Accessible Information Standard (AIS) to identify, record, and meet the information and communication needs of people with a disability, impairment, and/or sensory loss. This ensured people were given information in a way they could understand.

People had person-centred care plans covering their communication needs. Information was shared with visiting health and social care professionals where necessary to ensure people could get the best out of medical and other appointments.

Staff provided information to people in formats that were accessible to them, for example, pictorial, in large print, and verbally. A staff member said that when assisting people with meal choices ‘we don’t just talk or show a picture, we show plated meals – it’s more real for people’.

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.

People said they could speak freely to any of the staff or the managers, including the provider’s representatives. A person told us some people had raised concerns about the food. Managers listened and changed suppliers, and the food was improved as a result.

Relatives said it was easy to raise concerns with staff. A relative told us, “We discuss any issues straight away, I just go to the person on the desk that day and they just sort anything out straight away.” Staff said they talked with people and relatives daily and checked they were satisfied with the care and support provided. A staff member told us, “We also use the time when we’re delivering care to talk and see how people are, then we might go back later if they had a need to talk more.”

The service’s complaints procedure ensured that any concerns/complaints were fully investigated, and feedback given to the complainant. People and relatives were encouraged to speak out to staff or managers at any time. The manager had an open-door policy and a surgery twice a week for feedback on the service. Managers and staff had a positive attitude to concerns/complaints and saw them as opportunities to improve practice and learn lessons.

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

Managers and staff knew how to access specialist health or social care support, including out of hours and in an emergency. Records showed people’s medical and other needs were met either at the service or in the community.

The premises were accessible. People had the equipment they needed to support their mobility, for example, hoists, profiling beds, and walking aids. Some services, for example dentistry, opticians, and hairdressing, were provided on site for people who preferred not to travel for their appointments.

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.

People’s care plans included information about their culture, religion and sexuality. Staff were trained in equality and diversity. Managers and staff understood how discrimination and inequality could disadvantage different groups of people using the service. Protected characteristics were identified and addressed to ensure the provider complied with equality and human rights requirements.

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.

Records showed people were supported to make informed choices about their care and plan their future care while they had the capacity to do so. People who were approaching the end of their lives were identified and information was shared with other services and staff as necessary.

The service’s end of life care plans were highly personalised and provided staff with the information they needed to ensure people’s decisions and what mattered to them were at the forefront of their care. If people needed extra medical support at the end of their lives, staff referred them to a palliative care team who provided visiting specialist health care support.