Grey Gables

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

People’s communication needs were being considered and people were being cared for in a person-centred way. Documents were available in different formats to ensure they were accessible for all. Complaints were responded to, and detailed analysis completed. Advocates were actively involved in people’s care and support. Staff felt people living at this service were happy and cared for well.

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.

People told us they felt staff understood what was important to them and relatives felt their loved ones were cared for by staff who knew them well.

Staff told us relatives were involved in people’s care provision. The registered manager told us people had a choice as to whether they shared their support plan with family members. People’s individual choices were respected and listened to.

We observed staff talking to people using a person-centred approach. Staff asked people what they would like to do and encouraged them to do things for themselves where possible. We witnessed staff involving people in decision making.

People’s feedback raised no concerns about care provision, integration and continuity. Relatives told us they were happy with the care their loved ones received.

Staff told us they monitored concerns and reported back to the registered manager. One staff member said, “If I had any concerns on people’s health, I would report this to the manager straight away.”

Feedback from partners was mostly positive in this area. One partner said, “We meet with the provider on a fortnightly basis. The team at Cedar (Grey Gables) will also get in touch in-between times if there is something that needs to be raised.”

We saw evidence of referrals being made to other healthcare professionals as and when appropriate. Regular reviews were carried out by various professionals to ensure people were receiving the appropriate level of care.

People’s feedback raised no concerns about providing information. Relatives told us staff communicated well with their loved ones and that their feedback was sought through feedback forms which were completed and send back to the management team.

Staff told us how they communicated to people using a variety of tools including picture cards. One staff member said, “We communicate to people in a way that suits them. Some people use visual aids and emotional calculators. We have had training on this.”

The service was working within the principles of the Accessible Information Standard. Documents were available in easy read formats to make them more accessible and inclusive for all. This included service user guides, safeguarding information and information relating to medicines. Staff had training on different methods of communication and support plans held detailed accounts of people’s communication needs. The communication information in support plans was person-centred to the person and offered prompts for staff. This also included a section of what to do and what not to do when communicating with a person to ensure they were relaxed and comfortable with staff. People’s privacy was respected, and all personal care records were kept secure.

People told us they knew what to do should they have any concerns. When asked what they would do if they had a concern, one person said, “I would tell my key worker.” Another person told us they would report any concerns to the registered manager. Relatives told us their feedback was sought through satisfaction surveys and that they felt comfortable raising any concerns with the registered manager or with staff.

Staff told us they promote decision making by asking the person what they would like to do. Staff knew the escalation process for raising concerns and felt comfortable speaking to senior managers and the registered manager.

Processes supported listening and involving people. We reviewed records of complaints which had been actioned and responded to. A complaints policy was in place and a copy was kept in service user handbooks. Audits were undertaken to analyse how many complaints had been made, what the responses were and what action had been taken following on from a complaint. Advocates were actively involved in people’s care and support. Feedback was sought from people using the service in innovative ways. Monthly meetings took place with the person, their key worker and other staff members if required. These meetings gave the person the opportunity to talk about anything they wished, including what is important to them and how staff can help them reach their desired goal. This supported people to feel included in their care and support.

People’s feedback raised no concerns about equity in access. Relatives told us they had no concerns about the care their loved ones received and felt confident in the staff and management team.

Staff told us they felt people were supported well. One staff member said, “I feel the care we deliver is relaxed and we go at the persons own pace.” Staff advised emergency cover would be arranged if staff were unwell.

Partners feedback raised no concerns about equity and access.

People were supported by staff to access services in a way that suited their needs. Support plans detailed how people should be supported when out in the community and each person had a plan tailored to their individual needs. Reasonable adjustments were in place to support people to access a range of health care and community locations and arrangements had been made for emergencies and out of hours care. Staffing was at a safe level to ensure people received care and treatment as and when needed and plans were in place for emergency situations. This included on call arrangements.

People told us they felt respected by staff and that they were treated fairly. People also spoke positively about being able to access the community.

Staff told us they had no concerns about this service or of people’s care provision. One staff member said, “I have no concerns about this service. I love working here and think it is a really good environment to work and for people to live. If I needed care, I would like to be somewhere like here.” Another staff member told us they felt people were happy and well looked after.

Processes supported equality and protected people’s rights. People were empowered to be involved in their care and advocates worked closely with people to ensure people’s rights were protected. People were also encouraged to access the community and were supported to do so by staff who knew them well.

People’s feedback raised no concerns about planning for the future.

The registered manager told us no one was currently receiving end of life care or treatment. However, plans were in place to ensure these conversations could be held where appropriate.

No one at this service was receiving end of life care. However, there were care plans ready to be completed should this be necessary. A policy was in place for end of life care planning and to guide staff on recognising the signs and symptoms of when someone was reaching the end stages of their life. The registered manager spoke about the difficulty of broaching this subject and not wanting to upset people. Plans were in place to prompt conversations and to help approach this topic on a more sensitive level.