Roebuck Nursing 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

People felt at the centre of their care. Care and support was provided in accordance with peoples needs, preferences and choices with strong processes in place to ensure all people were treated as individuals and received equal access to care.. There were clear systems in place to ensure people, staff and relevant stakeholders were listened to and involved in the decisions about care and treatment and the running of the service. Feedback was actively sought by the manager and provider, with complaints and concerns responded to positively. People were provided with accurate and sufficient information. This was in a format of their choosing. People received the information and support needed to informed decisions and make plans for their futures. Where this included decisions regarding care at the end of their lives, this was done with care and sensitivity with all relevant information included within their plans of care.

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.

People felt their needs were met in a way that respected their needs, preferences and choices. A person said, “I like it here, staff help me when I want it and can have things how I like them.” Care plans were detailed and gave clear information about people’s needs, preferences and lifestyles. These were updated with changes and reflected people’s involvement.

Staff told us they felt they provided person centred care. All staff providing feedback said they would be happy for a relative of theirs to live in the service. A staff member said, “Care is person centred. People are given options to express themselves and share what they think of the care they are all receiving and the staff looking after them.”

People’s needs were met on an individual basis. Support was given in line with people’s needs and wishes and staff knew people well. We saw staff chatting with people and following their preferred routines.

People with varied and, at times, complex care needs were living at the service. Staff worked with professionals to ensure their support met these needs. We observed staff adapt their approach depending on the needs of people they were supporting.

Feedback from the registered manager was clear. They explained that the service provided equal opportunities and there was a clear demonstration through the assessment process that the service considered the needs of different people, including those with protected characteristics.

Feedback from partners were positive. They confirmed that staff and management actively used the multi-disciplinary team meeting, and ad-hoc contact, to ensure continuity of people's care and ensuring reviews were completed effectively.

Care plans included information from reviews held to ensure correct funding was provided. For example, for nursing care. Staff worked with professionals to provide the relevant information.

People told us they had access to information as they needed it. A person had chosen to keep their care records in paper format rather than move over to digital care planning with the rest of the service.

Staff confirmed that information was available at the service, but they were clear on access arrangements and when confidentiality should be maintained. The registered manager confirmed that information could be provided in different formats when needed such as pictorial, large print or in a language other than English.

The provider had a clear and up to date ‘service user guide’ which provided information to people, relatives and stakeholders regarding the availability and provision of care, treatment, and support at the service. Care plans detailed people’s preferred communication methods and ways in which staff should adapt their communication.

People told us there were meetings they could attend and were happy to make a complaint or speak up about anything they needed to. A person said, “I can speak up if I’m worried or anything.”

Staff were positive about the how the registered manager responded to concerns. A staff member said, “The home manager is approachable and very helpful when problem arise.”

There were systems and processes in place to seek feedback from people. This included a complaints process, regular meetings and surveys. The registered manager also used daily checks to ‘check in’ with people and make themselves available to any feedback people may wish to share with them. All feedback was recorded, with records showing actions taken in response and how the information was used.

People told us they received the care, support and medical support when needed.

The registered manager confirmed that people were treated equally. There were consistent arrangements in place for the planning and delivery of care for everyone, without discrimination.

Feedback from partners was positive. They confirmed services were accessible and found staff to be helpful and proactive in their work to ensure people received the care they needed. One partner stated, “The team are very responsive and treat residents as individuals with their own variety of needs. It is always a pleasure to work with a responsive and caring team.”

The provider had a clear system in place to ensure all people had access to care, support and treatment outside of the service as needed such as the enhanced care practitioner, out of hours GP, or escalation to emergency services if needed.

People with a variety of needs, backgrounds and cultures were supported by the service. They told us they felt well supported. Our observations found people had the right support and had freedom to live how they chose.

Staff told us people were treated equally and as individuals. A staff member said, “Each resident has their own needs and preference, we respect all of them. I could trust Roebuck care home that they would take good care of my relatives if they were admitted here.”

The service had policies and processes in place to ensure people were treated equally and took action to ensure all people were provided with opportunities to give feedback about their care.

People were supported to discuss their preferences about their future care needs and, where they wished to, the end of their life. People receiving end of life care were comfortable and had the support they needed.

Staff were able to clearly explain what good end of life care looked like. They told us about a holistic approach in place. A staff member said, “Promote the person's physical comfort, dignity, mental and emotional, spiritual needs. Respect their wishes and ask their family more about their likes and dislikes. For example, some residents like to hang their favourite pictures.”

Care plans included end of life care information. This included if people had chosen not to speak about it. There was a record of any Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) and Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) processes completed.