Richmond Heights

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 received equal access to care, without discrimination. The senior team were aware of people who were likely to experience inequality and actively listened to make sure people’s care was tailored address this. People were supported to follow interests and to take part in activities that were socially and culturally relevant to them. We received mixed feedback about involvement in care reviews and care planning. We discussed this with the registered manager who agreed to discuss further in resident and relative meetings. The service provided information to people in a way that they could easily read or understand with support.

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 and their relatives were positive overall about the support provided by staff. However, we received mixed feedback about response times to call bells. One person told us, “When I press my buzzer they come as quickly as they can. Another told us, “If they are busy, they can take a bit longer to come.” The registered manager completed audits of call bell response times and agreed to review to ensure call bells were always answered promptly.

Staff were familiar with people’s needs and where people’s needs had changed the provider had systems in place to record the changes and to communicate these changes to the staff team. One staff told us, “We have regular flash meetings and the communication between staff is very good.” Staff received training in person centred care.

Staff showed a good understanding on how to support people living with dementia and people whose speech was limited. For example, we saw staff get down to people’s eye level and speak calmly and clearly. People’s care plans included guidance for staff on how to provide personalised care, centred around each person’s specific needs. We felt some people’s care plans would benefit from further development.

People told us that should they need support from health professionals this was available. One person told us, “Oh yes if I needed, they would get a doctor.”

Staff told us they worked well with health care professionals to ensure people received joined-up care.

Overall, we received positive feedback from partners. One visiting professional told us, “Staff are always engaging and caring. They tell us when they are concerned about things. They approach us if they have any concerns.” Another told us, “They are really good at monitoring pain.”

Systems and processes were in place to ensure information was recorded and shared with staff. People’s care plans were regularly reviewed and contained information about their care needs, including any health and medical needs. They also included evidence of regular partnership working with health professionals.

We observed staff communicating and interacting with people in a way that they understood. This included speaking to them clearly, at their eye level and allowing them time to take in the information and respond at their own speed.

Staff gave us examples of how they tailored communication to meet peoples individual and diverse needs. One staff told us how they supported people to make choices at mealtimes, “We make 2 plated up so they can show the residents the choices. We have a visual menu including pureed options to show people what choices they have.”

People's communication needs and preferred method of communication was recorded in their care plan. Information was available in different formats and tailored where needed to individual need.

We saw staff during our visit listening to people and respecting their choices about their day-to-day support. People and relatives told us that were relative and residents’ meetings at Richmond Heights for them to be involved in. One person told us, “They do try, and I have been to a meeting. I have put things forward a couple of times and they did get done.” Some people and relatives were unsure whether they were involved in their care planning. The registered manager agreed to review this with people and relatives in meetings.

Staff shared with us how they listened to people and involved people in decisions about their care. One staff told us, “I’d ask them questions about their loved one and find out the little things that might make the person more comfortable. Their personal likes and dislikes and what matters to them and how best to communicate with them.”

There were several ways the provider listened to people and other stakeholders. These included surveys, meetings and monitoring of complaints. The provider had a complaints policy which included ways in which concerns could be raised, the process for dealing with any concerns and further steps that could be taken if complainants were unhappy with the resolution.

People had access to support and treatment when they needed it. People were supported by external professionals including from the local GP practice. We saw staff providing support to people throughout the day and ensuring they had their needs met.

Staff understood people had a right to receive the care and support that met their specific individual needs. Staff told us they supported people to access healthcare when it was needed. One staff told us what action they would take if someone was at risk of falls, “I would get the falls team involved, report any falls and get to know when they’re most unsettled (at night or day). Try and reduce the risk as much as possible.”

Overall, we received positive feedback from partners involved in the service. One commented on partnership working, “It works really well. If communication from the surgery isn’t clear they are very good about coming back to us."

Records evidenced people had referrals made to external professionals where required. One person was supported through joint working with partners including the GP surgery and remote frailty team to have treatment at Richmond Heights rather than admittance to hospital. They were able to support with a mobile ECG (Electrocardiogram) and prescribe intensive medicines on site allowing the person to remain at Richmond Heights as they wished.

People understood their right to be treated equally and fairly and were provided with the care and support they wanted based on their specific needs. People were engaged and supported by staff to be included and have the same opportunity as others to receive the care and support of their choice. We saw people were supported with activities to match their individual needs, cultures and religions. At the time of our visit activities for Halloween and Diwali were planned.

Staff understood people had a right to be treated equally and fairly and to receive care and support that met their specific needs. The provider was aware of respecting a diverse staff team and made adjustments to support staff experience positive outcomes. One staff told us about individual adjustments put in place to support them with their personal circumstances.

Training records showed staff received equality and diversity training as part of their role. Records maintained about activities and events at the service, showed staff actively supported people to meet their specific needs by arranging special events and occasions to openly celebrate these in an inclusive way. This included religious services taking place at the service monthly for those that wished to celebrate their faith. Where people required specific diets to meet their personal, cultural or religious needs these were available. The provider actively sought out the views of people to continuously improve the service, so they received regular feedback from people and their relatives. The service provided information to people in a way that they could easily read or understand with support. This helped them share their experience of care.

People were supported to make informed choices about their care including at end of life, and this was recorded in their care plans.

Staff told us they supported people to make informed choices about their care and future care needs. Staff had received training which supported them to provide end of life support. Staff worked with partners, people and families to complete respect forms and choices around end-of-life support.

Assessments are completed with people and/or families and professionals prior to admittance. These are regularly updated and information on how to support with all identified needs and wishes are recorded in care plans. Where appropriate, this also includes people’s requests for their end-of-life care, guidance around resuscitation and information about their spiritual and cultural wishes.