Shoemaker Place

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

While the provider had systems in place to monitor and review people’s care needs, this did not always lead to positives outcomes. While the provider acknowledged and responded to complaints, the learning from investigating complaints was not always shared with people and their relatives or the wider team. While the staff we spoke with had a good knowledge of people with end-of-life needs, not all staff had received end of life training where required. However, staff made sure people were happy and comfortable with the care they received and listened to people’s thoughts and views. Staff provided people with information in a way which meets people’s communication needs. People told us they were treated equally and could access support when needed. Where people required reasonable adjustments, these were made.

This service scored 64 (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 received care that was centred on them and their specific needs.

Staff told us they provided care and support to people that reflected people’s choices and preferences. One staff member told us, “I know people’s individual needs. For example, for people with eating needs, I explain calmly the importance of eating well and the benefits on their health.”

We observed staff making sure people were happy and comfortable with the care they received and listened to people’s thoughts and views. If people wanted to have their care provided in a different way, staff respected this and delivered this in line with people’s wishes. Staff explained their role in respect of each person they supported without having to refer to people’s records. This was because they knew people well, their needs and preferences.

People told us they were happy with how the care home worked with others to ensure their needs were met. One relative told us, “We had originally planned for my [relative] to move into more specialist care however we found the care home were able to meet their individual needs by working with health agencies. The staff have been so kind and compassionate.

While staff told us they work closely with health agencies and escalate health concerns when needed, care plans did not always include information about when staff should involve other agencies in meeting people’s clinical needs. The operations manager told us the provider was working closely with the local authority and other agencies to make improvements in the quality of care they deliver.

Professionals supporting people living at Shoemaker Place did not always feel people received an equitable service. One professional told us, “Although things are improving, I feel people at the care home who are more physically independent are happier and catered for better than those with more complex needs. Staff sometimes refer people to us for nutritional support however they are not always proactive in encouraging people to eat and drink in the interim.”

While the provider had systems in place to monitor and review people’s care needs, this did not always lead to positives outcomes. For example, where people were had needs in relation to constipation, nutrition or behaviours care plans did not always include information about how staff should escalate concerns and health advice was not sought when required. This meant people were at risk of not having their health needs met.

People told us they received feedback from meetings held by the provider. One person had the minutes from the last residents meeting in their bag. One relative told us, “There is a social media group which includes photographs and keeps families updated with what is happening.”

Staff provided people with information in a way which meets people’s communication needs. We saw staff communicate with people in an appropriate way, speaking clearly and taking their time where required. One staff member told us, “For people who require hearing aids, I ensure they are available, and batteries are working. I make sure I get close and make good eye contact to make communication is easier.”

While people were able to choose their meals from menus, the inclusion of pictures may help some people to make choices more easily. People’s care plans included information about their communication preferences. The provider ensured people were informed of upcoming events and posters were made available. Minutes of resident and relatives meetings were made available to people and relatives. Staff received training about how to keep people’s information safe.

While people told us they attended meetings and received feedback about the service, people were not always involved in reviewing their care plans.

Staff told us they included people and relatives in their care. One staff member told us, “We like families to get involved in activities if they are on when they visit.” Another staff member told us, ”For one person who needs a lot of support, we like to nurture family involve and they visit a lot.

While the provider acknowledged and responded to complaints, the learning from investigating complaints was not always shared with people and their relatives or the wider team. People had the opportunity to attend residents meetings and provide feedback about the service. Residents and relatives meetings included discussion about upcoming activities, mealtime experiences and staffing. We saw actions from meetings had been completed. For example, a subscription service had been enabled on the cinema to allow people to access films and sports. During the inspection we observed the provider holding a taster session with residents in view of providing a wider menu choice. Questionnaires were made available to people and their relatives and were located in the reception area.

People told us they were treated equally and could access support when needed. One person told us, “I prefer to spend time in my room. Staff always ask if I would like the door opened or closed and ensure I can use the call bell if I want to stay in my room. One relative told us, “To allow our [relative] as much independence as possible, they have technology in their room in case of falling, mobility aids and staff check on them regularly.”

Staff told us they understood people should have equal access to provision. One staff member told us, “We are looking into securing another adapted vehicle (taxi provision) so people with more complex needs are able to participate in activities in the community.”

Professionals supporting people living at Shoemaker Place did not always feel the care home ensured people with more complex needs achieved equitable outcomes.

Where people required reasonable adjustments, these were made. For example, people requiring the use of a hoist resided on the ground floor for ease of accessing and leaving the premises and evacuation when needed. Mobility aids and specialist equipment was made available to people where required. The service contacted emergency services when required and knew when to involve specialist services in people’s care.

While people did not express any concerns about their experience and outcomes, lack of guidance in care plans for people with more complex needs meant people did not always access services when needed.

Staff gave mixed feedback about people receiving health support when needed.

While the provider had systems in place to ensure people received support when needed, lack of guidance in care plans for people with more complex needs meant people did not always access services the necessary support.

People told us the provider planned for their future care needs.

Staff told us they worked with health agencies to ensure people’s end of life needs were met.

While the staff we spoke with had a good knowledge of people with end-of-life needs, not all staff had received end of life training where required. People’s care plans included information about their end-of-life preferences. People had RESPECT forms in place where required. The provider worked with the palliative care team to ensure people’s end of life needs were met.