Grange House

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.

Staff made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people and their relatives how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People and relatives gave positive feedback about staff, telling us, “Staff do their best for people and the care is very good” and, “Care staff seem very very good, very caring and have made [person’s name] feel very welcome.”

We saw that people received care that was person centred and responded to their needs. Care staff were attentive and understood how people liked their care provided taking into consideration their needs and preferences.

A visiting health professional told us, “The staff themselves are warm and welcoming and are always very helpful when I have questions or need information on a new resident and their needs.”

Staff understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Care staff worked closely with any health professionals to ensure collaborative care for people. For example, working with OTs to ensure any changes to a person’s moving and handling support needs were being managed safely.

Care professionals we spoke with confirmed staff put people first and we observed staff making calls to a number of different health providers throughout the inspection, referring people when there had been changes to their health or following up on current health and care needs.

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

Relatives told us they felt involved in people’s care plans. When someone new moved into the home, staff spent time speaking to family to learn more about the person’s needs. Relatives confirmed they were updated of any changes.

Since 2016 all organisations that provide publicly funded adult social care are legally required to follow the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The Accessible Information Standard tells organisations what they have to do to help ensure people with a disability or sensory loss, and in some circumstances, their carers, get information in a way they can understand it. It also says people should get the support they need in relation to communication.

People’s communication needs were considered and information was available for people. We saw some dementia friendly signage around the building. Communication care plans are in place for people, however, these were quite generic and could be more personalised.

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.

There had not been any recent relatives or resident meetings. However, staff told us they involved people in decisions and relatives told us staff kept them updated regarding any changes. People told us if they felt able to share their ideas or raise concerns. One person said, “I feel perfectly safe here. I feel I can talk to people, speak up to staff.”

There was a complaints policy in place, and people and relatives confirmed they would be happy to raise a concern if they had one. Short customer feedback forms had been used to get feedback from family members. We saw the provider had recently provided one to a relative following an issue with a persons’ room which had now been resolved. The feedback form included that their overall experience of the home was very good.

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

Healthcare professionals were involved in people’s care and treatment. Referrals were completed when needed to ensure people received the right support and specialist care when required. People were supported to attend appointments for new or existing health conditions and some health professionals visited the home, this included the community dentist, OTs and foot health professionals.

Relatives confirmed staff acted on behalf of their relative, arranging registration with a new GP when they moved into the home and ensuring the health support the person received before moving into Grange House continued.

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 staff understood the importance of treating people fairly, regardless of any cultural, health or social differences. Some people lived with dementia or short-term memory issues, and we observed staff support them with patience and understanding.

Staff spent time with people talking to them and their relatives. This helped staff understand people and their preferences and tailor their support accordingly.

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 care plans in place which included information for staff to follow in the event of their death. This included any decisions regarding who should be contacted and whether there were any specific requests to be followed. It was noted that some end of life care plans could be expanded to be more personalised.

Do not attempt resuscitation (DNACPR) and Recommended Summary Plans for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) forms were in place detailing some peoples wishes and choices.