Clifton Gardens Resource Centre

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 did not always receive person-centred care. Care plans were not always personalised, and people did not have opportunities to live fulfilling lives which met their needs and preferences. Their basic care needs were not always met, for example people could not always have showers when they wanted these. There was not enough information to help staff plan how to care for people at the end of their lives or when their health deteriorated. The systems for promoting equality and diversity were not always effectively operated. There was not enough information about people's cultural, religious, and diverse needs and how these could be met. Although, people were offered a variety of culturally appropriate food and some opportunities to worship. We did not assess all the quality statements within this key question. We did not identify concerns relating to these areas which we judged as being met at our last inspection.

This service scored 61 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People's needs were not always being met. Most people had support to be washed and dressed. People did not have opportunities to take part in activities that reflected their preferences and interests. Failure to provide personalised care and support was a breach of Regulation 9 (person-centred care) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

People did not always receive personalised care which met their needs or reflected their preferences. Care notes for one person showed they had asked for a shower on multiple occasions but were unable to have one because of problems with the hot water supply. Care plans and assessments did not always contain information about individual needs and referred to generic actions for meeting people's needs. Information about individual needs was not always clear because different parts of people's care plans gave contradictory information. For example, one care plan referred to a person being independently able to use the toilet. In another part of the care plan, they were described as needing staff support to change pads because they were not independent. People looked well cared for and were wearing their own clean clothes. However, one relative told us this was not always the case. They explained, ''When we visit, [person] does not always look well groomed. On occasions [they] can be a bit dishevelled. We don’t say anything but I guess the staff are a bit overstretched.''

The staff explained they did not always have time to meet people's needs. For example, some people had to wait for support with personal care or to eat their meals because they needed assistance, and the staff were busy attending to other tasks and helping other people.

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.

People did not always feel their views had been listened to or acted on. Some people explained they had not received a satisfactory response when they spoke up about things they did not like. One person told us they had raised a complaint about the quality of the food and were told, ''No one else has had a problem with the food.'' Some people and relatives felt improvements were needed in this area. One relative commented, ''The communication could be improved. I have a lot of questions which need answering.'' There were organised meetings which people could attend and contribute to. People told us they felt these were useful.

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.

The local authority (registered provider) had policies and procedures for providing equity in experience. However, people's cultural and religious needs were not reflected in the care they received.

Not all staff had undertaken training in equality and diversity. The staff knew people's individual needs and some staff spoke different languages. This helped them communicate with some people who also spoke other languages.

Care plans did not include enough details about how people's diverse needs could be met. We looked at the care plans for some people who did not speak English as a first language and who had specific religious and cultural needs. These needs were not reflected in their care plans. There was a section about how equality and diversity needs should be met. For 1 person, their care plan stated, ''Please treat me with dignity and respect at all times.'' For another this section of the care plan stated, ''I respect people and would like to be respected too.'' There was no information about how to meet their cultural, religious or language needs. The information recorded by staff indicated they had failed to understand the importance of recording what people's /diversity needs were and how these would be met.

Care plans did not give any details about how people wanted to be cared for at the end of their lives. We looked at care plans for people who had a range of religious and cultural needs. None of these were reflected in their end-of-life care plans. For 1 person, their end-of-life care plan stated, ''I do not have a DNR (do not resuscitate agreement). I will say when not feeling well.'' For another person the end-of-life plan stated, ''I have a DNR in place.'' There was no other information. Failure to plan personalised care was a breach of Regulation 9 (person-centred care) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.