Forster 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

Care was delivered in a person-centred approach. The service was not always responsive when involving health professionals as agreed in local authority plans prior to moving into the service. People had outcomes, however, some health outcomes for people were not actively taking place. The service adapted communication and ensured up to date information was provided to people and relatives.

This service scored 32 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People had person centred care plans and risk assessments in place. Care plans captured likes and dislikes and agreed ways people liked their care to be received. People had their personal belongings in their bedroom.

Staff told us how they promoted and provided person-centred care. We observed staff caring for people taking into consideration their wishes and preferences. Staff and management responded to people appropriately and in line with their care plan guidance. The registered manager and staff encouraged people who moved in to make their bedrooms personal to them. This included decorating and having items such as personal photos.

The registered manager and staff told us how health services were involved in people’s care. This included doctors, nurses and local behavioural teams. Stakeholders provided feedback which demonstrated the provider reached out appropriately for additional health services when required. This could be to gather additional training or advice on a person’s care needs. We raised at this site visit the delay of 1 service user gaining access to a dietician as agreed in their plan from the local authority prior to moving into the service. The registered manager informed us this was due to awaiting the person to be registered at the local GP surgery, as the person had only moved in 2 weeks prior to our assessment visit.

The provider had a process in place where they were flexible to meet people’s needs. Where support hours were required to be adapted to meet people’s activities, this took place. People were encouraged to be involved in local community activities and events that took place.

The service had adapted communication to meet people’s needs. This came in the form of easy read documents. Care plan guidance was in place to help staff to effectively communicate with people that ensured the person’s needs were met.

Staff understood the different formats in which documents were available. The registered manager told us, before people move into the home, an assessment involving all stakeholders was completed to ensure appropriate communication guidance was in place. Staff and management understood the importance of communication being made available for all and that information was up to date and reviewed regularly.

The provider had a process in place where accessible information was available, this information could be found in easy read, large print or picture format. We saw relatives were asked about their preferred communication methods as part of the pre assessment when moving into the home. This would be phone calls, emails or letters. Where guidance was updated, for example, COVID-19 guidance, the provider ensured all who lived in the service and relatives were sent the up to date information.

People were asked regularly by staff and management around feedback on their care. We saw relatives were asked for feedback on care provided and were able to suggest ideas and improvements for the service.

The registered manager told us they requested feedback from relatives, stakeholders and health professionals which helped them improve the service and care provided.

We saw surveys were sent out to relatives and people to gain feedback. This was completed shortly after moving into the home and annually. Where relevant, we saw evidence the service actioned improvements following feedback.

People were able to access the care and support they required as needed.

Staff told us, when a person required additional support from a service outside of the home such as GPs, nurses and speech and language therapists, numbers were available, and the management team supported with the referral process.

The home would complete referrals to additional health professionals or stakeholders where appropriate. We saw where referrals were made these were recorded in a person’s care records and care plan.

We observed staff supporting people to achieve their outcomes. Care plans for people were tailored to match their care needs and personal interests.

Staff understood how to care for people equally and recorded the care they provided in daily care notes. The provider would assess and understood the importance to meet people’s preferences. For example, where people requested, they only received support from male carers, the home looked to match this preference and would seek to recruit staff in response.

People were involved in important changes to their life. We saw stakeholders were invited to best interest meetings, this ensured that where the person lacked capacity, the correct people were involved in making a decision that could impact or change a person’s life.

Staff told us how their role included helping people plan for their future This included sourcing places to attend in the local community, building up new skills and promoting independence skills within the home. The management team told us, due to the age range of people living at the home, end of life planning was not currently in place. However, this was something the registered manager was looking to explore with people and relatives.

The provider had a process in place to respectfully record people’s decisions about their future. This was on a best interest form, which then fed into their care planning. Staff received end of life training.