Angels Care Home Limited

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 remained 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.

People were not always at the centre of their care and treatment choices within their care plans. They included information about people’s backgrounds, and cultural or religious needs. People’s records reflected their choices and preferences which helped staff deliver the care and support people wanted.

However, there was risk people may not receive person centred care as some care plans lacked personalised information about what mattered to people. For example, care plans were more task focused and some sections about their hobbies and interests were not fully completed. We discussed how this could be improved with the registered manager who told us they were working on this. This included people’s life history sections within their care plans which would help staff get to know people’s backgrounds in more detail. Staff told us care plans were helpful. They worked in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to changes in people’s needs.

Staff told us they worked hard to make sure people received care and support that was centred around them. Staff demonstrated they knew people well and spoke about what people enjoyed and what was important to them. There was a handover process between shifts where staff shared important information with each other to make sure they were aware of people’s current health and any changes.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supportive of choice and continuity. People and relatives said staff worked well with them and consulted them. They told us they received care and support from staff they were familiar with, which helped by having consistency and continuity in their service.

Staff told us they understood people had a range of diverse health and care needs. A staff member said, “I can get to know people by reading their care plans. It is very useful and is important for us to understand.”Staff received training to meet the diverse needs of people using the service and we saw evidence staff compatibility was considered as part of the pre-assessment protocol. Relatives told us they always saw the same staff and they were happy with this as it meant their family members received a consistent service from care staff they were familiar with.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People’s communication needs were assessed and discussed during their initial assessment. This ensured staff knew how to communicate with people. The registered manager told us information was available in formats that were suitable for people to read, for example in large print text. People and relatives were positive about the service and the level of communication.

Staff were able to communicate with people appropriately using their preferred communication style. For example, for a person who spoke in their first language, a list of phrases or words in their preferred language, with their pronunciation, was available in their care plan. Other staff who did not speak the same language were able to use this. Staff and relatives told us this helped staff communicate with people in a way that suited their needs and helped make people feel valued and included. A relative said, “There is always very good communication from the service. We know them very well. The staff communicate with [family member] very well.”

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. A complaint procedure was available for people and relatives to use if they were not happy with the service or had concerns.

The service had not received any formal complaints since our last inspection. However, people and relatives told us they could speak with members of the management team if they had any complaints. They felt confident they would be listened to, and action would be taken to resolve any issues. A relative told us they knew how to make a complaint and said, “I have not had to make a complaint but I know who to speak to and the manager would address things straight away.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The provider followed processes to make sure people continued to have fair and equal access to services such as registration with a GP surgery and referrals to occupational therapists, district nurses and speech and language therapists. Daily notes were completed which gave an overview of the care people had received and captured any changes in people's health and wellbeing. This ensured all staff members were aware of any changes to people’s health conditions and could direct them to the appropriate health care professionals such as doctors and dentists.

Staff confirmed they had received training in equality and diversity, so they had awareness of people’s protected characteristics and the requirement for all people to receive fair and equal treatment irrespective of their characteristics such as gender, disabilities and race.

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. The management team told us people were assessed before they used the service to ensure their needs and preferences were identified and could be met.

Assessments of people’s diverse needs were discussed prior to using the service. The registered manager had an awareness of the groups of people who were at risk of inequalities and barriers to their care, for example people with disabilities or mental health needs.The registered manager said, “We treat people equally and fairly. We make sure all our clients have access to care they need regardless of their backgrounds.”Staff told us they respected people’s social and cultural histories and understood the importance of promoting equality, diversity, inclusion and people’s human rights.

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.

At the time of our assessment the service was not supporting people needing end of life care. However, an end-of-life care policy was in place. People’s families were involved in any decisions about people’s future care and support. People’s care plans included information about what was important to them and staff had received training in end-of-life care.