The Vale 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 68 (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 had personalised care plans in place, which included important information about their life history, interests and preferences. People and their relatives had been involved in developing these plans, and relatives confirmed regular reviews took place. One relative told us, “I have been consulted and given a copy of [person’s] care plan, and we had a meeting. [Staff] also email or telephone and keep me up to date.”

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. The service worked effectively with external agencies and professionals to ensure people’s needs were met in a planned and timely manner. People’s care plans included information and guidance from external professionals and people’s care records evidenced staff followed this guidance. People told us how staff positively supported them to access healthcare and relatives also confirmed staff kept them up to date with any changes.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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 service had not received any complaints. However, there was a system in place to manage complaints effectively. The service had received many compliments about the care provided. The registered manager in addition to holding regular resident’s’ meetings and having an open-door policy, had a book in the reception area of the service, where visitors could share their experiences. The book was frequently used and contained lots of compliments about the kindness and compassion of staff. A visiting professional had also shared, “What struck me on entering the building is how nice, light and bright the environment is, very welcoming to visitors, as are staff.”

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

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 rights were protected, care and support was provided in a person centred way which respected people’s differences and choices. People’s care plans detailed information such as their religious views and relationships that were important to them. The service worked with people to ensure these needs were met. The service promoted the use of advocacy services. An advocate supports and represents people to understand their rights and can support them to make an informed decision.

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. Staff worked closely with other professionals to provide dignified end of life care and had received training in this area. We reviewed people’s care plans and found the wishes people had expressed about care at the end of their life was recorded and regularly reviewed. Clear information was available to staff on the decisions people had made about their clinical care and treatment in emergency situations.