Chamberlaine Court

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 assessed 3 quality statements from this key question. Staff recognised the importance of knowing people well, but felt they did not always have time to spend with people or to engage them in meaningful activity. People were happy their care reflected their needs, but processes were not always effective in capturing their views, or the views of their relatives. People were able to access other healthcare professionals when they needed to. The provider monitored people to ensure those less able to express pain or feeling unwell had timely access to other healthcare professionals.

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 and their relatives described care that was responsive to their personal preferences and abilities. One person commented, “I think the staff look after me in a very responsive way.” Another person told us, “They treat me in a very personal way which relates to my needs.” One relative told us, “Staff that have been working there a while know [Name] well and how to deal with her. The strategy is to get the best person in on the days when she has her bad days.” Another relative explained, “[Name] can do quite a bit himself; he is quite independent but forgets to do things. There are always staff there checking if there is anything he needs help with.” People told us there were opportunities to be involved in activities, but staff were often rushed. Comments included: “There are activities every other day in the afternoon. They always ask me to go but it’s not for me. They never sit and chat much, they are too busy” and “I don’t want to do the activities, but they do tell me about them.” Relatives did not share any concerns about the activities offered. One relative said, “[Name] is happy, there are people she can talk to, she goes into the lounge, does a few activities. They get singers in, and they make things. Staff always make a fuss when it is someone’s birthday.”

Staff understood the importance of knowing people well so they could provide care that was centred on the person’s preferences, likes and dislikes. For example, one staff member explained the importance of knowing all about a person, "So you can communicate with them and chat about things. That is key, to know where they are coming from and what their life was like.” However, staff said they would be able to provide better person-centred care if they had more time to spend with people. Some staff felt people would benefit from a dedicated member of staff to offer more opportunities for meaningful engagement and encourage people to become involved. One member of staff told us, “I do quite a bit of activities if I have got 10 to 15 minutes and so do the other girls, but I think that is what is lacking here, a person to do activities." The registered manager acknowledged our feedback and explained how moving to an electronic system would reduce the amount of paperwork and give staff more time to spend with people outside of delivering care tasks.

Care plans were written in a person-centred way, taking into account people’s interests, preferences, routines and abilities. However, staff did not appear to have time to sit with people and engage them in meaningful conversation or activities to promote their social and emotional well-being.

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.

We received mixed feedback as to whether people and their relatives always felt involved in planning their care. Some people could not remember having discussions about their care plans but were happy the care they received reflected their needs. Comments included: “I’ve had no reason to raise any questions about my care, my care needs haven’t changed. I’m quite happy that they meet my needs”, “I can’t remember anything being said about my health records, I don’t remember seeing them. Staff seem to know my needs and keep me involved” and “I’ve no idea how to access my care records but I’m happy that I can control my care needs.” Overall, relatives reported feeling informed and listened to about their family’s member’s care. One relative told us, “I do feel involved. Any little thing happens, and they let me know. I speak to [registered manager] once a week for an update. Any problems I go straight to her, things have improved.” Another relative told us, “They do involve me in his care, they will ring me if they need an answer to things.” A third relative commented, “[Name] has improved since being there so the care plan must have changed, but I haven’t been updated.”

The registered manager spoke about the importance of involving people in making decisions about their care. They described situations where they had worked with people to accommodate their choices but also keep them safe and well. The registered manager explained, “It is about making sure people are safe but that they have a voice and an involvement in that." Where it was identified people needed support to ensure their voice was heard, referrals were made through the social work team for an independent advocate.

Information was available in the entrance to the home, informing people how they could provide feedback about the home. This included a suggestions box in the entrance hall and information about how they could share concerns or complaints about standards of care. There were also meetings where people and their relatives were asked their views on a range of subjects such as activities, menus and the cleanliness of the home. There were regular evaluations of people’s care, but feedback from people and their relatives demonstrated the process was not always effective in capturing their views.

People told us they could access other healthcare services for treatment and support when they needed to. One person told us, “I discussed needing stronger pain killers with the doctor and it changed straightaway.” One relative explained how their family member could often decline to follow medical advice but, “There is always a plan in place to what the next step will be.”

Senior staff described robust processes to ensure people saw healthcare professionals when they needed to. The registered manager told us they used a recognised pain identification tool to identify when people who were not able to verbalise their pain were becoming uncomfortable and needed healthcare support.

Healthcare professionals did not raise any concerns about people being able to access services when they needed to. One healthcare professional said staff had ensured a person still had access to chiropody and hairdressing whilst their finances were sorted out. Healthcare professionals said they did not have any issues making appointments to access their clients and were given a suitable room to meet with them.

People’s care plans contained information about signs of deteriorating health in relation to specific care conditions. For example, in catheter care plans there was information about the signs and symptoms of a possible infection. Staff handed over when people ‘were not themselves’ so extra checks and monitoring could be implemented. This ensured people less able to express pain or feeling unwell had timely access to other healthcare professionals.

We did not look at Equity in experiences and outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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