Telford Court Nursing 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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence the provider 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 68 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Overall, the provider always made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and worked in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. People told us their individual needs were supported, comments included, “I can choose when I go to bed and get up. I pick my own clothes” and” If I didn’t want a shower staff would leave it and ask next time.” Staff knew people well and understood their needs, however, records did not always contain the individualised information described by staff. Whilst some care plans contained person-centred information, others could be further improved or hadn’t been fully updated following reviews. Following our visit, the registered manager confirmed they were reviewing and updating all the care plans. Care plans and records were maintained on a digital system which enabled staff to record any interventions they had made with people in real time.

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. People were able to see their GP or other health professionals as required. One person told us, “I can ask for a doctor or painkillers when I need them.” The provider held weekly meetings with various health and therapy staff to support people undergoing further assessment . They liaised with social care professionals to review and respond to changes in people’s needs. For example, one-to-one care had been arranged for some people where deemed necessary.

The provider supplied appropriate information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People’s communication needs were considered as part of their assessment and care plan. Where needed, people were provided with information in alternative formats to meet their individual needs, including picture aids. If required, information was provided in large fonts and easy read formats. For example, larger print activity planners were provided to people in their bedrooms. Where English wasn’t people’s first language this was included in their care plans, including how staff should support them. Staff produced a regular newsletter to keep people informed of events, activities and any changes, as well as updating a Facebook page.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. The provider’s complaints procedure was on display. People told us they felt able to raise any concerns. One person said, “If I was unhappy, I would tell staff.” Relatives told us staff involved them and contacted them with updates. Comments included, “I get information from the unit staff without asking.” Staff held regular meetings with people and their friends/families to enable them to share feedback and ideas about the service. The provider produced a ‘You said, we did’ plan from feedback, highlighting the actions they would take in response.

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Health and social care professionals visited the service when people were unable to attend appointments. Primary healthcare practitioners visited the service twice weekly and reviewed people’s health and medication needs. The provider had links with a local chiropodist and optician. Overall people were supported to obtain equipment to support their individual needs. However, in one case two people were sharing a piece of equipment, this meant when in use with one person, staff were unable to follow the care plan for the other person. Staff had previously referred the person for specialist assessment, however, the provider had not ensured this was followed up in a timely way. Following the assessment the registered manager confirmed an assessment date had now been agreed.

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. The provider had an equality and diversity policy. A hearing loop had been installed to help support people with their hearing.

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. Staff were undertaking the ‘Six Steps to Success in End-of-Life Care’ program to support the quality of end of life care they provided. Staff worked with a local end of life partner. Advanced care planning meetings were held, and care plans were in place to enable people to discuss and record their wishes.