The Spires

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 needs were met through good organisation and delivery. 

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.

The provider 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. People gave us examples of when they felt staff had supported them in a person centred way, including supporting people and their relatives to celebrate key family events and involving relatives in their family member’s daily routines where requested. Some people told us some staff were more person centred than others, with some staff appearing rushed and more focused on completing tasks. Care plans were mostly personalised but required further development to ensure staff had access to people’s specific requests, routines and preferences.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. Staff had regular meetings with health professionals to review people’s changing needs and people were supported to access health services. The provider ensured clinical oversight, support and guidance was available for staff where required. Relatives told us they were kept updated with any changing health needs. One relative told us, “Staff contact me straightaway if there is anything they need to tell me about.” People were supported to go out locally and visit places of interests and culture or do their shopping. The registered manager had established positive links with local community groups who visited the service to meet with people. Staff supported people to access a range of activities that were designed to meet their emotional, physical needs and provide meaningful stimulation.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People and relatives did not raise concerns about accessing information. People’s care plans provided guidance around how they communicated. However, there was lack of detailed guidance in terms of how people preferred to receive their communication. For example, large print or verbal or pictorial information. The registered manager was reviewing care plans following our site visit.

The provider 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 and relatives told us they felt comfortable to raise any concerns if they had them and felt these were listened to and acted on. A person told us, “I have never had to make a complaint, but I would if I needed to.” The provider obtained people and relatives’ feedback through regular surveys, resident meetings and suggestion boxes. We saw satisfaction was consistently good with positive feedback overall.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Managers had good working relationships with local health professionals, and knew how to contact the appropriate teams to support people when the need arose. People and relatives confirmed staff were quick to respond to changes in people’s needs and supported people to contact routine and specialist services when required. A person told us, “I am totally bed bound now and staff bought equipment for me and are in the process of replacing some equipment, as my needs have changed and they want me to be comfortable.”

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. A relative described how staff had responded to a decline in their family member’s health by adapting their approaches and care provision to ensure they were included in day to day events. Staff advocated for people when liaising with health and social care services to ensure their views and needs were listened to.

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. People were given the opportunity to discuss their end of life wishes and care plans reflected their wishes where they had made decisions. People were supported to identify outcomes where they chose to stay at the service for a short time, for example, to recover abilities in order to return to their own home. A relative felt further information around the dementia journey would be helpful in enabling them to understand the impact for their family member. We raised this with the registered manager who arranged for relatives to meet with a dementia specialist for support.