The Old Vicarage

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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the

rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. People told us they felt they were involved in their care and any decisions regarding it. One person told us, “The staff ask about 11 o’clock what you want for lunch.” We observed staff explained any care that people needed during our inspection.

People’s care plans were detailed and reflected their care needs however, occasionally information was not always consistent. We discussed some examples with leaders who told us they would take action to review these.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. Other healthcare professionals who worked with The Old Vicarage told us, “Care provision and diverse health care needs of residents are addressed…care staff respond according to health needs of their residents including access to services that are out of hours and all contact numbers are available in the care home.” Leaders told us they worked with local healthcare professionals to deliver training to staff and build positive working relationships.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Leaders assessed people’s communication needs in order to help people understand their care and choices. People told us they were supported with any communication needs, for example, people told us they saw the local optician so their prescription for any glasses could be reviewed. Care plans identified when people liked to use their mobile phones to keep in touch with family and friends.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. People told us about the residents’ committee. One person told us, “I am on the committee we talk about lots of issues like the putting green, the library and food; I suggested a putting green because we have a couple of people who played golf, and we play games, and we need to improve the library.” We reviewed the minutes of these meetings and found people had regular opportunities to give feedback on recent activities and celebrations, as well as contributing ideas for forthcoming events and helping to plan menu choices. Leaders told us they took the time to have ‘catch-up’ meetings with people, so they had the chance to get to know them more and also give people the opportunity to raise any feedback; they felt for some people it was easier to raise feedback if they spoke with just one person or in small groups rather than in a larger meeting. Records showed that people’s feedback was considered and contributed to an improved service, and any complaints were managed in line with the provider’s complaints procedure.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People had access to the care and support they needed. Referrals to other services were made when appropriate. Adaptations and adjustments were made to help people access the building and parts of the outdoors.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. People told us about how they accessed other healthcare services. For example, the visiting GP and local optician. Other people told us how staff helped them attend any hospital appointments and helped to arrange transport to these.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

When appropriate, staff had sensitively discussed people’s wishes and decisions for their end-of-life care. People’s care records contained any advance decisions they may have made.