The Orchards Residential 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

In this key question we looked at two quality statements relating to person-centred care and listening to and involving people. Although staff demonstrated a good understanding of what person-centred care was, we found people were not always involved in decisions about their care and found staff members did not always support people in line with their needs and preferences.

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.

Relatives told us of examples where the provider went above and beyond to provide person centred care. One relative told us: “They [service] had to jump through quite a lot of hoops so that [person] could have her [treatment] there as they are not licensed to administer it, but with the support of the Haematology Nurse, staff were trained how to administer without touching anything, storage problems were overcome and with regular visits from the pharmacist, it went extremely well. I was blown away by all that. They really did put [person] first.” Other relatives told us: “Carers who knew [person] were aware she liked to get out and about when she could, so they took her shopping; for coffee and she loved the Christmas Pub visit.” However, some relatives told us they felt staff did not always communicate effectively with their relative. One relative told us: “The staff don’t seem to take into account [person’s] hearing problems, they stand at the door and talk to her, and she can’t hear them.” Another relative told us: “I have found carers standing on that (blind) side and wondering why they can’t get [person] to do things”. A person we spoke with also told us about some of their preferences which had not been considered.

Staff had a good understanding of what person-centred care meant, describing this as “care that’s tailored to the individual”. Staff told us they felt they applied this within their role. The manager explained how person-centred care was applied and promoted. The manager told us: “The individual comes in and it’s an ongoing process, we find out about their likes and dislikes, we may need to re-evaluate their care plan. The transition moving into care can be huge. We talk with family to find out what they used to do, to get it as much personalised as we can.”

We observed activities taking place and these appeared to suit the needs of most people. However, we observed some people were not always offered support to help them engage in the activities taking place

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.

One person told us the service had asked them a lot of questions before he moved to the service. One relative told us: “When I have had concerns, I can talk to them, and they will take action and report back to me.”

Staff told us how people were involved in decisions relating to their care. One staff member told us how the chef sits with people and asks them about their favourite dishes, which was done through the ‘resident of the day’ process. The manager explained the steps they had taken to improve one person’s experience within the service.

We saw evidence which demonstrated people were invited to give feedback about their care, during resident meetings and the ‘Resident of the Day’ process. We saw changes were made following people’s feedback about their care, such as suggestions of new activities and food preferences. However, we found one person who had capacity to make decisions about their care, had not been involved in their recent review of their care, despite the person expressing they were unhappy living at the service. The manager explained this was an individual case whereby feedback from the resident was obtained in alternative ways. However, there was no evidence in the person’s care plan of such feedback having been obtained & incorporated into their care plan.

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.