Sycamore Court

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 Good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this. People felt their individual lifestyle choices were respected by staff and they felt confident that any concerns or complaints would be dealt with fairly and quickly.

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.

The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. One person said, “They let me live my life in my way and support me.” A relative said, “Spot on, give them the care they want and always consult me.” Staff told us, “We try to ensure we respect their personalities including their quirks, the care plans are followed so we follow people’s wishes.” People's care plans and risk assessments were personalised for each person and information was kept up to date. Care documentation enabled visitors to engage with people as they reflected people’s individual interests and preferences for communication support. People’s care was person centred and supported by information about what people enjoyed doing with their time and what was important to them. Activities were provided by staff in line with people’s interests. We saw that this happened throughout our site visit. Staff were considerate and respectful of people’s individual needs when they supported them. For example, people in bed were comfortable and staff ensured that they had their favourite music on, or television show and staff interacted with them positively, addressing them by their preferred name. During meal times, staff assisted people if they required it, by prompting or by assisting them to eat. There was a relaxed atmosphere and people enjoyed their meals.

Staff local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. The home worked closely with a number of health professionals involved in people’s care. The registered manager was receptive to advice and feedback from other professionals and used this to consistently improve care. One person told us, “I get to see my doctor, I also see a chiropodist.” Relatives told us they felt well informed and assured that if needed, specialist advice would be sought straight away. One relative said, “They contact me if there is a change or my relative needs to see a specialist.” Staff told us that they worked alongside families and always inform families of any appointments and keep a record of the appointment and advice given. A health professional told us, “Staff are always professional and polite. They know residents well and contact us when needed.” We were also told, “No complaints.” Care plans were regularly reviewed and contained detailed information about people's care needs, including any health and medical needs. They also included evidence of regular partnership working with health professionals such as specialist nurses, and therapy teams. These records were well documented and showed responsive co-ordinated care. Staff were able to discuss how they ensured people were treated equally and fairly no matter their age, sexuality or their health diagnosis. They told us of their knowledge of the Equality Act and how they used this in supporting people and decision making.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Information regarding people’s communication needs were documented in their care plans. Staff told us that they tried different ways of communication with people, "We use hand gestures and people’s body language, their faces tell us if they are in pain or happy/sad." Staff responded positively and creatively to people’s communication needs. Since 2016 onwards all organisations that provide publicly funded adult social care are legally required to follow the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The standard was introduced to make sure people are given information in a way they can understand. The standard applies to all people with a disability, impairment or sensory loss and in some circumstances to their carers. People’s communication needs had been assessed and recorded within individual communication care plans. These included specific information on how people’s communication needs could be met and what aided their communication. For example, those who needed spectacles or hearing aids had specific care plans. Systems to support people to communicate with staff, relatives and friends had been assessed and promoted. For example, staff supported people to call their families if it was achievable, staff also told us of how video calls had been used. All care plans were on a computer and this enabled them to be printed off for family, hospital appointments and transfers. They could also be enlarged for those that have sight impairment. We were informed that all organisational documents could be provided in an alternative language if required.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. People told us they were asked for their views and felt listened to. Relative, resident and staff meetings took place and there were opportunities to feedback regularly. There was a ‘You said, we did’ board displayed which included comments and requests from people and what action had been taken in response. There was a complaints policy and procedure, we saw that concerns raised had been responded to promptly and thoroughly. The management team kept a log that ensured the registered manager had an overview. They told us they had an open-door policy and we saw people and relatives popping in to speak to the manager to share information and ask questions. Relatives told us, “I can raise concerns, with any one of the staff, very approachable.”

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Relatives told us people were supported to continue to access the care and treatment they required outside the home. For example, for people with long term health conditions, staff worked with specialists and GPs to ensure care and support was provided. People were able to access care, treatment and support when they needed to, this was confirmed by families, staff and care records. There was evidence within people’s care records that when staff identified a health issue, they acted immediately and people received treatment and care promptly with no barriers experienced. Records showed staff had received training in Equality & Diversity and they explained how they treated people equally, without discrimination and respected their individual needs, including any religious or cultural needs. People’s care plans contained information about their wishes in relation to how their social, cultural and spiritual needs needed to be met. This included care plans around sexuality, emotional support and daily lifestyle. The premises was safe and suitable for people with physical needs. Environmental risk assessments had been undertaken and reviewed regularly to ensure people continued to be able to access all areas of the service safely. For example, all bathrooms had suitable aids for people to use independently and safely, such as raised toilet seats with supports.

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. Relatives told us that their loved ones are included and involved, and that they feel welcomed and listened to. One relative said, “Always welcomed –feel involved.” Staff told us, “As a team we make sure everybody is treated with respect and that no-one is discriminated against.” There was evidence of regular review and support from supporting health professionals within peoples' care plans. Staff ensured families were involved in all decisions. There were no restrictions to visiting, families were welcome at any time. There were organisational polices that ensured the provider complied with legal equality and human rights requirements.

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. We could not ask people for their views and so families were asked. One relative said, “I was involved in decision making with the doctor, we completed a respect form and I could ensure my relatives wishes were followed.” Staff were able to tell us about people and their preferences around end of life decisions. One staff said, “Everybody has this information recorded on their care plan, it’s important we follow it.” When people needed end of life care, staff worked closely with other health care professionals to provide the best care for people in a compassionate way. Staff delivered care that took account of people’s wishes and their comfort. Care plans identified people's preferences at the end of their life and the service co-ordinated palliative care in the care home where this was the person's wish. Care plans contained information and guidance in respect of peoples' religious and resuscitation wishes. Everybody had a ReSPECT form in place. ReSPECT stands for Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment and ensures their personal wishes are followed. Relatives and friends were supported with compassion through this difficult time. For example, visiting for those people at the end of their lives was extended, with the facility to stay overnight if wanted.