Blackwell Care Centre

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 68 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices. Care records fully reflected people’s holistic needs and staff were observed to support people in line with the person-centred guidance. Staff had a good understanding of what providing person centred care looked like. One staff told us, “All people are individuals with different preferences.” Relative feedback included, “I was immediately impressed by the friendly staff in all roles. The carers have established a very good relationship with relative and they appear to have good skill levels.” And “Care at Blackwell is amazing. We could not be happier, and we like the way that carers seem to anticipate my relative’s needs. I would recommend this home for anyone.”

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

Information was available in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People’s communication needs were assessed. For example, one person’s care plan had identified the importance of positive body language when communicating with a person with anxiety. Appropriate policies and guidance were in place, in line with national standards, to ensure information was provided in an accessible way.

Opportunities were in place for people, relatives, staff and partners to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about care. For example, regular meetings and surveys. People were informed of what had changed because of concerns raised. Relatives confirmed they knew how to raise complaints or concerns and were confident they would be listened to. One told us, “If we have a concern about anything, we will raise it with the registered manager or a senior colleague and we get an informed response.” And “The registered manager clearly listens and responds to the issues raised with improvements where feasible. Communication with family members is much better.”

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Systems were in place to identify and remove barriers to improve people’s experiences. For example, the tool used to calculate staffing levels identified a significant change in one person’s needs and a requirement to review their funding so to receive the appropriate support. One relative told us, “[Relative] was having difficulty doing puzzles and the home arranged for provision of new glasses.” Staff received training in equality, diversity and human rights. One relative confirmed, “I was very impressed by a change to improve [relative’s] quality of life.”

People were supported to plan for the future, including end of life care. Some end-of-life care plans required further detail, but these were reviewed monthly and respected people and relative wishes as to what was included. Other end of life care plans contained person-centred details about specific wishes, such as religious requests. Staff had received end of life care training and told us about the importance of empathy whilst delivering end of life care.