Chase House Limited

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 changed to requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met. The service was in breach of the legal regulation in relation to person-centred care. We identified care was not always planned or delivered to meet individual’s needs and preferences.

This service scored 43 (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 did not always ensure people were at the centre of their care. People’s care plans required more detailed information to enable staff to understand their support needs. For example, records showed 1 person could sometimes need the assistance of 3 staff members to support their mobility. However, there was no information on how these staff members would provide that support. Another person’s care plan highlighted a person was to receive their medicines in their preferred manner but did not specify what this was.

Due to our findings about people’s religious and cultural needs not always being met, we could not be assured the service understood people’s diverse needs. However, referrals were made to external professionals were required. This promoted continuity of care.

Some improvements were required to ensure the service always supplied appropriate information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. For example, we did not observe any visual aids being used to support people in making their meal choices during our inspection. However, we also found positive communication methods and good practice, such as information displayed about how to raise complaints, safeguarding concerns and whistleblowing. A relative told us, “They have ways of communicating with [person], they will show [person pictures if [person] doesn’t understand something.”

We were not assured of people’s involvement in decision making due to our findings around consent and staff not always documenting enough information when people experienced emotional distress. However, there were systems in place to seek feedback from relatives. For example, at the time of our assessment, a satisfaction survey was being conducted. Regular residents’ meetings were also held. There were systems in place to manage complaints and concerns. We observed staff checking if people were happy in a structured way while carrying out "resident of the day" checks. Relatives gave us overall positive feedback about how the service communicated with them. A relative told us, “I get a phone call once a month, a catch up. When I go in, I get an update from staff, communication is brilliant.”

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The service had made appropriate referrals to external health professionals such as the falls team and the dementia intensive support service. The service's layout was accessible to people with a range of mobility needs.

People were not 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 lives. We found several people's end-of-life care plans had not been completed and therefore did not contain any information about their wishes or any cultural, religious requirements or personal preferences that needed to be observed at the end of their lives.

People were not 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 lives. We found several people's end-of-life care plans had not been completed and therefore did not contain any information about their wishes or any cultural, religious requirements or personal preferences that needed to be observed at the end of their lives.