Chaseley

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

The service had made improvements and are no longer in breach of the regulations. People's needs were met through good planning and delivery. Their care was delivered in a timely way, with any changes in care being communicated clearly to staff. People were supported to maintain contact with people who were important to them. People engaged in activities that were individualised to them. People had access to information about how to raise a complaint. Where complaints had been raised these had been responded to in line with the provider's policy. People's future plans end of life care needs were met in line with their preferences in a respectful and dignified way.

This service scored 68 (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 had a care plan which accurately reflected their needs, and they were involved in its development and review. One person told us, “Yes [my care plan is] constantly reviewed, because my problems are MS and Parkinson’s, it keeps needing to be updated.”

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed people were fully involved with their care planning and where appropriate, any relatives or significant others. People’s care plans reflected their physical, mental, emotional and social needs, including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. Staff told us they had access to people's care plans and that they were regularly reviewed and updated. They told us care plans were informative and provided clear guidance on how to support people. A manager told us, “We have put so much effort and work into the care planning systems. We have learned from other homes. Senior staff analyse the care plans and we shar information to make changes.”

Staff were observed treating people as individuals, they engaged people in activities and conversations which showed they knew people well. People appeared to be relaxed and at ease in the presence of staff. Care plans contained person centred information that enabled staff to know what care and support people needed.

People told us they were involved in decisions about their care and support. They told us staff supported them to access other services as and when needed. A relative told us, “We wrote out all [my relative’s] needs, so continuity was maintained. They changed her medication when she moved, so her behaviour is better. She’s healthier and happier since she’s been here.”

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed people received a good continuity of care. The registered manager told us there was a joined-up approach to care from both internal and external services, and how the person’s own social worker was regularly consulted in reviews of their care. Staff told us they had developed good working relationships with other professionals that were involved in people’s care and support.

Feedback from external partners confirmed people received care and support which met their individual needs. One professional told us, “As far as I know, staff support and meets the resident’s needs in a safe manner. Chaseley provides adequate training for all staff to achieve this.”

Processes were in place to ensure when people’s care involved external services, it was delivered in a co-ordinated way which met their needs and preferences. In addition to having access to external professionals, people had access to in-house professionals such as physiotherapists and nurses.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

People said they would speak up if they had any concerns and were confident they would be listened to. One person told us, “I have made a complaint before, it was all handled very sensitively.”

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed they actively listened and involved people. They described how they communicated with people in a way they understood, and which was meaningful to them. The registered manager explained how they used surveys, reviews, meetings and also the formal complaints procedure to obtain people’s feedback. They also told us, “The complaints process is in place, with logs, analysis, supporting information, outcomes and learning. We support people to complain and raise concerns, and we share this information with the trustees.” Staff knew about the complaint's procedure. Staff told us they would take complaints seriously and follow the providers complaints procedure.

Processes were in place to ensure people’s voices were heard. There were opportunities for people to make a complaint or feedback to staff at any time. The management team also operated an open-door policy. Any concerns raised were treated with compassion and as an opportunity to learn.

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.

People told us they felt in control of their care and support. They told us they were treated fairly and felt confident about sharing their views. One person told us, “Even down to mental health staff boost you, they will spend the time with me if I am down. Any problem or issue I have I can turn to them.”

Staff said they had completed training around EDHR (Equality, Diversity and Human Rights), which helped to recognise, promote and protect people's protected characteristics. Staff showed a good awareness of what discrimination meant and how to challenge any concerns.

Processes were in place to help ensure people’s care, treatment and support promoted equality, removed barriers and protected their rights.

People were involved in decisions about their future, and they felt listened to. People told us they made decisions about their home. People talked about what they hoped to do in the future and told us they talked to staff about their plans.

Staff told us they held conversations with people about their futures plans and aspirations, including leaving the service to live more independently. Staff had received end of life care training. They also confirmed they had good support from external health care professionals when this was needed.

The registered manager had systems in place, to ensure people had access to the right care and treatment at the time they needed this, so people would receive a dignified death. People's care records contained information about their long-term plans, which included, living more independently in a community-based setting.