Laural 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

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 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 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. Staff used person-centred approaches to discuss and plan with people how to reach their goals and aspirations. The person-centred approach had led to reductions in medicines and staffing ratios for people. It had also enabled people to have increased social opportunities. One relative told us, “Compared to how [relative] was 10 years ago is amazing, they have done such a good job getting [relative] to where they are now.”

The service 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 worked with other professionals to make sure people’s needs were met. Records viewed, and feedback from visiting professionals showed referrals to professionals were made when required. One professional told us, “Myself and the social worker will frequently meet with staff and the [registered] manager of the home to talk and review the placement.”

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The service supported people to express their views and offered choices tailored to individual people using a communication method appropriate to that person. People’s care plans contained information about people’s individual communication needs. Staff told us about communication tools they used to support people to make choices. This included sign language, objects and pictures. We observed staff communicating with people in their preferred method of communication.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people and families in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. The service had a complaints policy, however no formal complaints had been received since the last inspection. Staff undertook meetings where people were supported to express their views. One staff member told us, “Keyworkers speak to people each month about what they are happy with, what they want to do, their goals.” Relatives told us they felt involved. One relative told us, “They involve me with anything important yes, anything that can wait they don’t which I don't mind as I feel they have got a handle on everything.”

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Reasonable adjustments were in place for people who needed them. This meant people had a positive experience, good outcome and their disability did not prevent them from accessing the support they needed. The service had recently changed the bathroom to a wet room to meet the changing needs of the people living at the service. One staff member explained how before supporting someone on holiday they identified eating establishments that were able to accommodate the persons specialist diet.

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. Staff received training in equality and diversity which gave them an awareness of barriers and discrimination which people living at the home may experience. Staff and management advocated on behalf of people to ensure they led a full life. One professional told us, “The home and [registered manager] in particular is fantastic at communicating any concerns or changes relating to my client.”

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. Support focused on people’s quality of life outcomes. People’s outcomes were regularly monitored and reviewed. At the time of the assessment the service was not supporting anyone at end of life. However, people had been consulted, and records had been kept regarding people’s end of life wishes.