Marsden Heights 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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs. We received feedback that people received care which was person-centred and the service involved people and relatives in decision making. Reasonable adjustments were observed throughout the home. People were involved in decision about their care and treatment and the running of the home. People and relatives knew who to speak to if they had a problem and were generally confident that staff were approachable and responsive to concerns.

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.

Generally, people and relatives confirmed that people’s care met their needs and preferences and promoted empowerment and decision making. A person living at the home said, “They help me with a shower if I want it and my family can come at any time to take me out.”

Staff confirmed that people and relatives were regularly involved in planning and making shared decisions about people’s care and treatment. This was done when care plans were created and during regular reviews. Staff gave examples of how people were also involved in decisions about their lives such as what to do, what to eat, and what to wear. The registered manager advised, “Our staff are familiar with resident’s needs. Continuity of care assists staff in establishing rapport with people and picking up early signs of changes in people’s needs.”

People could receive the most appropriate care and treatment for them as the service made reasonable adjustments where necessary. We observed various mobility aids, safety measures and dementia friendly signage around the home. Staff were seen to provide different levels of support to people dependent upon their needs. For example: some people had 1:1 support for certain tasks, whilst others were encouraged to do things more independently.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

Most people and relatives we spoke to knew how to give feedback about their experiences of care and support, including how to raise concerns. A person using the service advised, “If I have a problem, I will tell staff. They might not be able to sort it there and then, but they will get back to me.” Another person said, “You can talk to [staff] about anything.”

The registered manager gave examples of how people and relatives could give feedback in a range of accessible ways, and confirmed people were kept informed about how their feedback was acted upon. Staff spoke to us about how they supported people or relatives to escalate concerns. A staff member said, “I would ask them what they weren't happy about, document it and pass on to the senior or manager if I couldn't resolve the problem.”

People and relatives had the opportunity to feed back and be involved in shaping solutions via monthly resident meetings, annual surveys or a comments and complaints box stationed in reception. Resident surveys were sent out in an easy read format with pictorials, to promote engagement. The service’s complaints procedure was kept on display for ease of access and ‘you said, we did’ posters communicated changes made following feedback. Learning from complaints and concerns was seen as an opportunity for improvement. Following a concern raised by a relative, information had been included in staff meeting agendas to help prompt against poor practise.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in experiences and outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.