97 Old Street

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.

This is the first assessment for this registered service. This key question has been rated 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.

Care plans were person centred to ensure care was provided in accordance with people’s individual needs and preferences. For example, people were supported with personal care in a way and at a time of their choosing to help reduce their anxieties.

People were offered a range of meaningful activities. During our on-site inspection visits numerous activities took place, including people going out to do their chosen activity.

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.

A relative told us, “The correspondence is very good. We receive a regular newsletter. I am kept informed of the important things such as any medical concerns or appointments.”

Staff had completed training and understood the Equality Act.The provider gave us examples of when they had collaborated with other professionals to ensure care was joined up. They also told us some professionals visited people in the home which helped alleviate some of the people’s anxieties. This helped to remove some of the barriers to care.

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

People had communication aids in place, including electronic tablets and communication boards.

Easy read documents were available, and the provider evidenced how these had been used to support some people. For other people, where easy read documentation was not helpful, staff who understood their specific communication style were available to aid them. This meant people could make their needs and wishes known to staff.

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 living in the home were asked for their views in a variety of formats throughout the year, these included in daily conversations, meetings with their keyworkers, and through surveys. Action plans were devised from these meetings and survey’s and were shared with people. This meant people’s views were listened to and drove improvement.

The provider told us, where needed they engaged the use of advocacy services to ensure people were heard. We reviewed evidence of this taking place.

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

Staff understood the needs of autistic people and people with a learning disability and worked hard to ensure typical barriers faced by people were removed or mitigated against.

Each person had a hospital passport in place. We reviewed these documents and noted people’s individual risks and health conditions were included. This could be shared with other professionals to reduce potential barriers to care within the health and social care system.

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 understood how the Equality Act 2010 applied to their role. Staff treated people as individuals and made reasonable adjustments for anyone who needed them. This meant people were less likely to experience discrimination.

The provider told us, “We have monthly keyworker meetings where we look at what is important to the person and what they want to achieve. We also discuss current topics for example voting or annual medical tests. We would assess the person’s capacity, hold best interest meeting with their circle of support and discuss and plan how we will help them achieve their goals.”

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 had end of life plans in place which included where people would want to be cared for at the end of their life, and some people had plans for their funerals which included religious preferences. People’s relatives participated in this ongoing process.