Starbrook

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

We reviewed 7 quality statements for this key question.

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.

People and relatives were involved in planning care and any care plan reviews. Relatives told us the staff approach was caring and staff worked hard to provide person-centred care. One relative said, “The staff are very big on listening and they do as much as they can to get [person] to communicate.” Another relative told us, “Staff do excellent work, some staff have known [person] for many years, they are the rock [person] depends on.”

Staff said people were involved in developing and reviewing their support plans. Staff were key workers for individuals and held a monthly review meeting with people and their representatives. This review meeting helped to make sure people were happy with the support they were receiving and if any changes needed to be made to care plans.

We observed people being supported in a person-centred way. People were spending time doing what they wanted. This included going out into the local community, spending time in their own rooms and completing personalised activities.

People had continuity with their care as they were being supported by a core group of longstanding staff. One relative said, “There are core staff who are excellent and some of the agency staff seem really good. Agency staff are always supervised which is good. [Member of staff] who has been there ages knows [person] so well. All the staff are very good.”

Staff had time to get to know people and their care needs. Staff were able to read people’s care plans and other information to learn about people’s likes and dislikes. This meant incidents of anxiety were reduced as staff understood people’s needs. The registered manager had good knowledge of local services and people’s needs.

Professionals did not share any concerns about this quality statement.

Staff worked with stakeholders and health professionals to make sure people’s needs were met. People had contact with the community teams for people with learning disabilities based at the local authority. Everyone working at the service recognised the need for good communication to work collaboratively. People had key workers which meant a member of staff was identified to work with them closely. The key worker role was involved in making sure care plans were reviewed and reflective of people’s current needs.

People could have information in ways that were suitable for their needs. We observed information being shared with people in a variety of ways. For example, communication boards were available at the service, giving people information on activities or other events taking place.

Staff and management told us they understood the need to provide people with information in ways they could understand.

Since 2016 all organisations that provide publicly funded adult social care are legally required to follow the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The AIS tells organisations what they have to do to help ensure people with a disability or sensory loss, and in some circumstances, their carers, get information in a way they can understand it. it also says that people should get the support they need in relation to communication. We found the provider was following the AIS making sure people’s communication needs were recorded and information could be provided in a variety of ways. For example, the provider had resources to make sure information could be provided in pictorial and easy read formats. Staff knew people’s communication needs and how to support people with any information sharing.

People and relatives had access to a complaints procedure and knew how to make a complaint if needed. Comments from relatives included, “I can raise a concern with anyone, any of the staff and any of the management” and “There is a good relationship with staff and family and the new manager is approachable.”

The registered manager wanted the service to grow and develop in response to people’s feedback. The registered manager said, “I want to get it right, I want to learn and grow, and having open communications is paramount.”

The service had a complaints policy and process. The provider also had information on their website about how to make a complaint or raise a concern. This included information on how to escalate any concern if they were not satisfied. The registered manager told us there had been no formal complaints since they started at the service.

There were different ways people and relatives could get in touch with the service. People and relatives could telephone which included an out of hours service. People could also email or use links on the provider website.

The registered manager told us they recognised people may face barriers to care so wanted to make sure the service was accessible to everyone using it.

Professionals did not share any concerns regarding this quality statement.

The provider had effective systems to make sure people’s care was provided without barriers. The provider had other services for people with learning disabilities and good practice and learning was shared across all their services. There was a central quality team who had oversight of care records and carried out sampling to make sure people were provided equal opportunities.

People’s care and support was delivered to meet their needs regardless of any barriers they may face.

Staff and management were aware of potential discrimination and barriers to care. The registered manager was passionate about making sure people had opportunities to lead a fulfilling life. The registered manager said, “We want people to take control of their lives with guidance from staff, we try to be non-discriminatory all the time.”

The provider had information about their values on their website and in booklets shared with people. Their values included overcoming challenges to give people the tools to achieve together. This was reflected in the support planning documents, where people were supported to plan out how to achieve their goals.

At the time of this assessment there was nobody experiencing end of life care. People had not been supported to start discussions on future planning, however, some relatives told us they had made plans and had arrangements in place.

Staff feedback about end of life care was mixed. Some had been provided with training on this area of care and had some knowledge. However, some staff had not been provided with training and lacked knowledge. The registered manager told us this was an area of care they were looking to develop. Conversations about future planning had started with some families and guidance had been shared.

The provider had tools available to support people to explore their future wishes and make sure preferences were recorded. However, this area of care planning had not been used at this service.