St Lukes 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. At our last inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (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 and managers worked with people to develop a personalised care plan with them which took into consideration their needs, risks and desired outcomes following an assessment. Care plans were detailed and contained information about people’s preferences, likes and dislikes, and included equality and diversity information. A person said, “I enjoy colouring and staff support me when I need supplies.” People were supported to take part in various activities that were meaningful to them. They had their own daily planners for things they wanted to do, such as going out on public transport, dancing, exercise and walks in the park.

A person loved colouring and were able to use their bedroom wall to express themselves through their artwork and display their pictures on their wall. We saw that all their equipment was neatly laid on the floor and they showed us a book of their artwork. The person told us they were happy with this arrangement. Staff also provided emotional support to help people manage their mental health needs. There was a welcoming and friendly atmosphere in the home and we noticed people respected each other’s personal space and got on well with one another. They liked eating together at the dining table and talking to staff. During a visit we made to the service on an evening we observed an after dinner activity where people were making Valentine’s Day cards. People told us they enjoyed making them. There was a large display of photographs in the communal area of people and staff enjoying activities, days out and celebrations.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible or supportive of choice and continuity. The provider was mindful of people’s personalities and needs when considering new people moving in and took steps to ensure that people got on before any direct transition planning took place. People told us they got on well with the staff and their housemates. Staff were able to tell us how disagreements and differences within the household were thoughtfully addressed to resolve conflicts. For example, staff and managers ensured there was additional training for staff for de-escalating situations. Staff were able to reassure and support people when they became distressed or angry and resolve incidents to keep people safe. They communicated with relatives to inform them of any incidents and also involved them in developing methods to help prevent future incidents.

People told us they received care and support from staff they were familiar with and there was consistency and continuity in the service. People were supported to integrate into the local community by staff. The management team understood people’s health and care needs and communicated with professionals so people could have access to local health services.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People’s communication needs were assessed and discussed during their initial assessment. This ensured staff knew how to communicate with people. Support plans and records were recorded in a number of different ways in line with people’s requirements for meaningful communication and decision-making, including in text, audio and video format. The provider met the requirements of the Accessible Information Standard.

People's preferred communication styles were used so they could take part in reviews of their care. This enabled people to have their views, opinions and feedback captured and acted on. Communication tools were tailored to each individual and available to them at all times to enable them to express their views, wishes and to make decisions. Staff received training in communication for people with learning disabilities or people who were less verbal. They could use Makaton, picture cards and understand people who used vocal sounds as opposed to speech. Staff also told us they understood people by looking at their body language.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. Staff worked with people’s relatives and others important to them to assist them to understand decisions they had made, and to advocate on their behalf when differences arose. However, a relative we spoke with expressed some concern about the protocol for relatives attending health appointments with their family members. We discussed this with the management team who agreed to speak with the relative and answer any queries. The relative told us they were happy with the service otherwise, and knew how to make a complaint.

People told us they felt free to raise any issues with their keyworker, the manager or the registered manager. They felt confident they would be listened to and action would be taken to resolve any issues. A person said, “I can speak to the staff if I am not happy.” Complaints were handled appropriately and a relative was positive about the service and the level of communication and responding to concerns. They said, “There is very good communication from the service. I get updates about [family member]. If there are any issues, I can raise them and I am confident they will look into it.”

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff and managers understood the needs of people with a learning disability and mental health needs. They worked hard to ensure that typical barriers faced by people were removed or mitigated against. Staff were able to access support from the manager and registered manager out of office hours. They were available on call when needed, for example if there was an incident or emergency.

Staff and managers followed processes to make sure people continued to have fair and equal access to services such as registration with a GP surgery or dentist. They had regular health checks and health reviews. The provider had a clear ethos for the service based on human rights, anti-discrimination and equity principles, and staff and people who used the service understood these. Staff told us they would challenge discrimination in the service and they respected people’s individual equality characteristics such as their gender and religious beliefs.

Staff and leaders listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. The management team told us people were assessed before they used the service to ensure their needs and preferences were identified and could be met. Assessments of people’s diverse needs were discussed prior to using the service. These included their religious beliefs.

People attended external appointments with reasonable adjustments being considered, planned for and communicated. This meant people had a positive experience and good outcomes. Any disabilities or health conditions they had did not prevent them from accessing prompt care and treatment.

Care plans recorded details about each person's specific needs and how they liked to be supported. The management team had an awareness of the groups of people who were at risk of inequalities and barriers to their care. Staff worked to ensure that reasonable adjustments were in place for people who needed them to live a fulfilling life and participate in the running of the service.

People were not always 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. End of life care was not being provided by the service, but an end of life care policy was in place. The management team confirmed people and their families would be involved in decisions about people’s future care and support. However, the provider had not yet documented if people and relatives wanted to discuss end of life care planning and had not established what steps would be taken if there was an emergency. The provider told us they would make plans to revisit the subject in the future.