Gwendolen Road Care 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

We reviewed all quality statements in the Responsive domain. We found people were supported by staff to ensure their health needs, experiences and outcomes were positive. Staff had access to care plans which detailed people’s backgrounds, preferences and protected characteristics. People were supported to access services within their local community. People and staff were able to communicate effectively in a range of languages. Accessibility of information was identified as an area for improvement, to both support and promote people’s independence and understanding through the provision of information in alternative languages. People’s views were sought, listened to and acted upon.

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.

A majority of people spoke of the choices and of their involvement about their care. A person told us “I can do what I like to do, whenever I want to do it, I choose to watch TV in my room, I like walking around the home and garden.” People’s views as to their involvement in care planning were mixed. A person told us, “I have little involvement in my care, my family sometimes gets involved if there is an issue, but there have been very few issues.” A second person told us, “My daughters involved in my care planning.”

Staff delivered person centred care and respected people’s choices and diversity. A staff member told us, I know the residents well. [Name] likes watching cultural movies and likes to change clothes frequently throughout the day.” Staff understood the diverse health and care needs of people. Staff worked in partnership with other health organisations involved in people's care to ensure care and support was joined-up and supported choice and continuity.

We observed numerous examples of staff delivering person centred care. Staff supported people according to their communication needs, which included enabling people to take part in our inspection and provide feedback of their experiences. Staff interactions were kind and considered individuals tailored support needs, for example supporting people to eat according to their cultural customs. People responded well to staff who they had developed positive and supportive relationships with.

People were integrated into the local community. A relatives told us, “Sometimes staff take [name] to the Sikh Temple or to the park.” Records detailed people’s involvement within their local community, which included leisure and recreational activities.

Staff delivered person centred care and respected people’s choice and diversity. Staff supported and encouraged people to access community services, including places of worship, cultural festivals, shopping and leisure services. Staff worked in partnership with partner agencies to ensure people’s care and support was joined up and supported continuity of care.

Health and social care partners was positive in that managers and staff were responsive to any deterioration in people’s health and wellbeing, and that information about people’s care needs across services was shared to promote continuity of care.

Systems and processes were in place to ensure information was accurately recorded and shared with staff. An electronic care planning system alerted staff to changes in people's care needs and enabled the provider to have up to date access to daily records. Care records were audited and provided assurance of people receiving continuity of care.

People had access to some information which was tailored to meet their needs, including information in alternative languages, pictorial formats and easy read documents. People were able to converse with staff in their preferred language or through gesture and body language.

Staff provided examples of how they tailored verbal communication to meet people’s unique and diverse needs. Staff were able to converse with people in their preferred language. The registered manager shared documents that were available in an easy read format, which included the complaints procedure, the service user guide, and information on mental capacity and consent, along with pictorial menus. The registered manager in response to our feedback advised they would review the accessibility of information and look to extend the range of information available in alternative languages.

Systems and processes had not fully identified or supported the range of accessible information to meet people’s needs. For example, people’s views of the service were sought through questionnaires and meetings. However, minutes of meetings and surveys which sought people’s views were not available in alternative languages. This meant questions from surveys, in some instances, were translated by staff. This had the potential to impact on people’s responses to questions, and limit their independence.

People had the opportunity to attend group meetings where their views, ideas and feedback were sought. A person told us, “I do attend residents meetings.” Whilst others, told us they chose not to attend. A person said, “I do not attend resident meetings but have had no concerns to raise.”

Staff were aware of the complaints procedure in place and felt confident the management team would address any concerns people or their relatives had. The registered manager shared minutes of resident meetings, which included people’s views and discussions held on a range of topics, which included the menu, activities and interests. People’s views about having a pet at the home were discussed. The registered manager told us a person had helped them choose a rabbit, and that a number of people were involved in its care.

Systems and processes were responsive to people’s feedback, comments, concerns and complaints. For example, a person said they found it difficult to find their way around the home. In response additional signage and pictures of people’s choosing were put on their bedroom door. Complaints were investigated and the outcome of the investigation along with action taken in response were shared and documented.

People were supported to access care, support and treatment when then needed it. People took part in routine health screenings, and were actively involved in cultural events and activities within the community.

Managers and staff recognised people living at the service maybe at risk of not receiving equitable access to services due to discrimination. Managers and staff promoted and advocated on people’s behalf, by supporting them, when requested to do so, to attend meetings and health appointments.

Stakeholders involved in supporting people who may experience discrimination due to their capacity to make informed decisions spoke positively of both the management team and staff in working with them to facilitate communication to achieve good outcomes for people.

The provider had policies and procedures in place to ensure everyone was treated with dignity and had equal access to opportunities and resources.

A majority of people spoke positively about the quality of their care and the person centred care they received. A person told us, I receive good care, I am treated as an individual in every way.” A second person said, “Staff support me very well, and I am very happy.” Relatives spoke of people being treated fairly and as an individual. “I trust all the staff and I’m very happy. They respect [name] and me.”

Staff and leaders ensured people living at the service had equal opportunities regardless of their diagnoses, backgrounds or personal ability. Staff were aware of people’s cultural backgrounds and beliefs and supported people to celebrate their cultural and religious needs.

Staff were knowledgeable as to people’s needs. The positive and supportive relationships which had developed, underpinned through training, enabled staff to promote good outcomes for people.

Records showed people were given the opportunity and support to talk about their end of life choices if they wished to do so.

Staff had received end of life care training. Managers informed us that planning for the future was discussed during the assessment process and as part of reviews about people’s care.

An End of Life care plan was included within people’s care records.