Parkfield House 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 that the service met people’s needs.

At our last inspection we rated this key question outstanding. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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.

People did not always receive person-centred care because their needs had not always been accurately assessed and planned for. Staff did not always know about people’s care needs and did not always provide personalised responses when people requested help. However, people told us their personal care needs were met, and they were able to have showers and baths when needed. They were clean and appropriately dressed. People had their own belongings around them and were able to spent time in their rooms or communal areas depending on their choices. The activities coordinators had helped people develop ‘life stories’ with important information about their lives and preferences. These helped staff to get to know people’s backgrounds and personalities.

The provider worked in partnership with other services to help provide continuity of care. People were supported to access community services and healthcare appointments. Therapists and staff from a local hospice and the palliative care teams offered regular support for some people. External professionals explained the staff supported them with integrated care. Their comments included, “We hold regular meetings and share information’’ and “The provider facilitates visits from local schools and [an organisation promoting art for older people].’’

The provider shared information with people about the service. These included posters about activities, menus, information leaflets and events. There was also information about advocacy services and how to recognise and report abuse. People told us they had the information they needed about the service and staff on duty. There was signage around the home to help people orientate themselves. Relatives told us the staff stayed in touch about the person they were caring for.

The provider listened to people and provided them with information about the service. There were regular meetings for people using the service and their relatives. People told us they were involved in these and had information about food choices, activities and changes at the service. People were also invited to complete satisfaction surveys about their experiences. Visitors were invited to give electronic feedback during each visit. Comments from people included, “We have residents’ meeting and the minutes afterwards, these are useful and they explain why things can or cannot be done.’’ Another person explained, “If the manager is asked a question, [they do] get back to you; I always find [them] to be responsive.’’

The staff had created a laminated communication booklet with short phrases and pictures to help people communicate without words if needed. The registered manager explained they also used pictorial cards with some people who did not speak English as a first language to help enhance communication.

People were able to access the care and support they needed both at the service and in the community. The provider worked with others to help make sure people had transport if needed to attend appointments and events outside of the home. Religious groups visited and people were supported to attend places of worship when they wanted.

People’s diverse needs were respected. The provider had procedures regarding equality and diversity. Staff had training to understand about this. The provider ensured people did not experience discrimination. The provider’s procedures were designed to overcome barriers to accessing services and to involve people in making decisions about their care and treatment where possible.

Some people’s care plans did not contain enough information about care at the end of their lives. These were not always personalised. People’s care plans did not always include their healthcare needs or wishes. We discussed this with the registered manager so that plans could be improved. Failure to provide personalised information could mean that people’s needs towards the end of their live were not being met.

Six places at the home were set aside for people receiving palliative care. The staff worked closely with professionals from the palliative care team and hospice to help support and care for people. The external professionals visited regularly to assess and monitor people’s needs and the care they were receiving in this unit.