All Care (GB) Limited - Lion Oak Court

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 service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (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. People told us they were involved in planning and reviewing their care. They told us that the provider scheduled regular review meetings where people were able to give feedback and request changes to their care if required. The registered manager had recognised where improvements were needed in ensuring care plans always contained clear information about how to support people. There had been positive work completed to document people’s background, specific needs and preferred routines in their care plans. However, some care documentation lacked person specific information about how risks should be managed and how people should be supported. Staff had a good understanding of people’s routines and preferences, which mitigated any shortfalls in the detail of care plans. Work to improve care planning was ongoing at the time of our inspection. The registered manager implemented a schedule to plan when people’s care needs were reviewed and care plans updated. They had prioritised reviewing the care plans of people most at risk. This helped to ensure people with the most complex needs were reviewed first.

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 provider worked effectively with other stakeholders involved in people’s care by making referrals to professionals when people’s needs changed or there were concerns about people’s welfare. This helped to ensure people received the support they needed.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The registered manager had a good understanding of the Accessible Information Standard and the requirement that information provided met people’s communication needs. In one example, staff supported a person to write down the timings of upcoming visits. Expectations around timings were managed by senior staff, to ensure people understood the window in which care would be provided. People confirmed they were happy with this arrangement.

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 told us the senior staff were responsive to their feedback and acted quickly to address any concerns. Senior staff were in regular contact with people, which gave them opportunities to give feedback about their care. This included care reviews and residents’ meetings, where people had the opportunity to raise issues and give feedback about their care to the provider.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The provider had policies and procedures around equality and diversity. People’s care assessments considered how to ensure people experienced equity in access to care, in a way that promoted equality and protected their rights.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. They then tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. The provider understood the potential barriers people may face to equity in outcomes and experience. They were conscious to promote people’s individuality to help ensure they were treated fairly and equitably.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future. There were very positive examples of how staff worked with people and other stakeholders to provide end of life care at the service. The registered manager had made links with a local hospice, who provided training and ongoing support to staff, when people wished to spend their last days in their own homes. The registered manger told us how they made accommodation available at the service, should relatives wish to stay with their loved ones when receiving end of life care. This helped to ensure they could spend the time with their family members if they lived far away. We saw many cards and letters of thanks from relatives of people who were supported at the end of their life at the service. This reflected the effort and thought staff put into people’s care.