Cherry Tree

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

During our last inspection, we found information was not always accessible to people to ensure certain activities were completed. During this inspection, we found improvements had been made. Information was accessible to people and robust communications plans were in place. Care plans were person centred and information was provided to people in a way they can understand. Systems were in place to manage complaints.

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 received person centred care and were supported well by staff. Personalised care plans were in place that included people’s routines and how they liked to be supported. One relative said, “I find the staff are very knowledgeable and supportive.” We saw evidence that staff followed and understood people's care plans and that people and relatives were also involved in completing care plans. Where appropriate, there was symbols and pictures used that was tailored for the individual person to help understand the type of support that was being delivered.

Staff told us they knew how people liked to be supported and gave us examples of people’s preferences. Staff told us that care plans were helpful and it helped them in their roles. One staff told us, “When I first started working here, I received person centred training, which really helped me look outside the box on how to adjust people’s care in a way that people understood how to do things.” The registered manager told us, “We look at different ways in supporting people as an individual, for example, we review people’s care plans on a regular basis and when incidents or barriers are identified, we adjust the care plan where needed. We also use different methods to support people to communicate. For example, we use objects reference and pictorial communication tools as well as electronic tablets.”

We observed that people were supported well and they had a good relationship with staff. People felt comfortable at the home. For example, a person was given a choice of what they wanted for lunch. Also, we saw that people were being offered activities throughout the day.

People had a positive relationship with staff and had access to services.

Staff told us that people had access to health services and local communities. One staff told us, “The key is that working closely together as a team and that we have good communication with each other including with relatives and other professionals.” The registered manager told us that systems were in place that included people had access to local communities and they worked jointly with other agencies to ensure continuity of care.

Partners were positive about the home. A professional told us, “I must commend the manager for being highly proactive whenever concerns arise and for effectively implementing any plans and actions put in place. The team has also participated in training organised by the local authority, which has greatly benefited joint working efforts. Their resilience in managing challenging cases has been commendable, with situations being handled proactively and all necessary information shared with the authority.”

Systems were in place to ensure people had access to care provisions, integration and continuity. We observed staff knew people well. Although the service was in a remote location, people were able to go outside and access communities regularly. Systems were also in place to ensure people were able to participate in activities.

People received information in a way that was accessible to them. One relative told us that they received a monthly report that showed what their relative had done during that month. This also included pictures of the activities as well as any concerns that had been identified and addressed. A professional told us, “I have been particularly impressed with their communication skills with service users based at the placement, which are clearly reflected in the way they engage with service users, which can be seen in their rooms.”

Staff told us that they had access to communication materials when required to communicate with people effectively and communications plans supported them when communicating with people. A staff member told us, “We use software, so people can listen to [written information]. We also read to people and use pictorial information.” Staff told us that, they have discussions in one-to-one meetings and staff meetings on different ways of introducing new tools to help people communicate more effectively. One staff member said, “One person uses object references if they want to do something such as going out and another person may take your hands and guide you to the task that they want to be supported.”

Communication plans were in place that included information on how to communicate effectively with people and people’s preferred communication style. Materials such as pictorial information was used to communicate with people. Staff followed health professional’s advice to ensure they were responsive to people’s needs. Systems were in place to involve people with decisions such as regularly getting feedback through meetings and reviews such as on their support and the home they lived in. Makaton workshops were also held for both staff and people to support them with communication.

People were able to share feedback about their care through key worker reviews and meetings. Relatives were very positive about the way the staff communicated with them. A relative said, “The service always contacts me to give me regular updates on how [person] is doing. I have also worked with the staff to show them other ways that may work when supporting my [person]. Relatives told us that the home always ask for feedback. A relative told us, “Feedback can be done by phone calls or meetings as well as questionnaires being sent on how I feel the service is doing. I feel my voice is always listened to.”

The registered manager and staff told us that systems were in place to obtain feedback from people and involve them in decisions such as regular reviews with people on their care. Staff were also able to tell us the process to manage complaints and concerns, which is escalated to management for review. One staff told us, “I would listen to the [person] and if it is something I can deal with, I would, however I would also inform my manager of the concern.”

Quality monitoring systems were in place to obtain feedback from people. Regular key worker meetings were held with people to attain feedback on their care and action was taken to ensure the care plans were updated so people received personalised support. Systems were in place to manage concerns and complaints. We checked the complaints log and records showed that appropriate action was taken.

People experience was positive on this area and relatives had no concerns. We saw evidence that care plans documented people’s protected characteristics and goals were set to enable their needs around this to be met.

Staff told us that people had access to facilities such as day centres and local communities. The registered manager told us, “We ensure that people are treated equally and as an individual. We support people with certain foods, which meets their cultural choices. We also support people to celebrate their cultural beliefs.”

Partners had no concerns in this area and people had access to social and health professionals when needed. A professional told us, “The care plans received for [person] were detailed and very person centred, and I feel that I was able to have a good picture of [person] and what their needs are and how they are being met. They have fully involved their family with all decisions and facilitate visits home.”

Care plans included services people can access. Regular audits were carried out to ensure people were well cared for and this included access to facilities and services.

People received good care and were cared well by staff. A relative said, “Since [person] has been living at the home, [person] medication has been reduced, this is far the best home [person] has lived in. I find that the staff always looked for solutions to help my [person] achieve the best outcome.”

Staff also told us they knew people well and their needs.

Care plans were personalised based on people’s preferences and choices. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the service and were clear about their responsibilities. They understood their roles and told us they were supported by the management team. Where people had any cultural or religious needs, these were recorded to ensure staff were aware of them. Staff had a good knowledge of people’s beliefs and cultural needs and ensured these were met. Quality assurance systems were in place to ensure people received safe care and support. This included regular audits on care plans and risk assessments to ensure people received personalised support.

People’s future aspirations were discussed with them as part of reviews of their care. This included activities they wanted to participate in and where possible end of life preferences.

The registered manager and staff told us they discussed future aspirations regularly with people such as what they would like to do in the future and this included how they wanted to be independent and how that can be achieved. The registered told us that staff received training on how to support people on end of life, if required.

Future planning was discussed as part of key worker reviews such as people’s goals and how they can be achieved. People were not receiving end of life care during the assessment. People’s end of life care wishes were discussed with their relatives. The provider had policies in place to help guide staff on how to support people to express their preferences on end of life care if needed.