Jubilee Care Home

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

Systems were in place to ensure people received person-centred care. People were listened to and provided with information. People, family members and external health and social care professionals told us they felt the service was responsive.

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.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

People and relatives were satisfied with the care they received, and felt their healthcare needs were responded to appropriately. People had access and links to the local community for example the local pub, museum and a church service was held at the home.

Staff knew people well and understood their individual needs. Staff recognised people’s independence and respected their rights to privacy. The registered manager was very passionate about the care provided and worked consistently hard to make sure people had choice in all aspects of their lives.

Care plans provided detailed information to enable staff to support people in line with their preferences. People’s care records contained information about their life history and things that were important to them.

We spoke with visiting professionals who were complimentary about the home and the care people received. One professional said, “Referrals are made in a timely and appropriate way and staff carry out care and support in line with our guidance.” Another professional said, “I can’t fault it here, I really can’t.”

Staff and leaders said people were supported to access information that they needed. The registered manager told us some people preferred to discuss things rather than read articles. Therefore frequent meetings were held to give people the opportunity to communicate with each other.

Both people and relatives were complimentary about the home. People and were satisfied with the care they received, and relatives were comfortable knowing their family members were well cared for. People told us they had access to all the information they needed and felt this was provided in a format which they understood.

Information was available to people in different formats, including large print if required. We saw range of pictorial signs were available to help people navigate around the home independently. These were bright and positioned at relevant places around the home.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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 had access to healthcare if they needed it. People were asked for their views on how the service was managed and they knew how to complain.

Meeting were available for people and relatives to attend so their voice and opinions were listened to and heard. People’s care plans evidence that they and their families were involved in reviews and on-going risk assessments to ensure people’s needs were met.

The registered manager was proactive in ensuring people felt listened to. Staff explained how they involved people in the care planning process and care plans were individualised to meet their needs and expected outcome.

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.