St Georges Lodge Residential 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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last inspection we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 68 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care choices and they did not always work in partnership with people.

We observed people having their lunchtime meal. One person was provided with salad, but other meals were slow to arrive. Three people went to sleep whilst waiting and 1 person observed, “There’s a big, long wait today.” Two people were provided with clothes protectors without being asked if they wanted them. We saw a member of staff assisting a person to eat their meal, but instead of sitting next to them, they stood over them, delivering forkfuls of food. This was done mostly in silence and seemingly in a brisk way that suggested it was regarded as a task to be completed.

Later, a staff member was asking people to choose their evening meal. One person was slow to choose and the staff member repeatedly asked them what food they wanted and then what type of sandwich they would prefer. It was clear the person was able to choose what they wanted and to verbalise their choice, but needed sufficient time to do so.

People told us staff knew them well. One person commented, “Staff ask for my consent if it’s anything out of the usual. They don’t ask if I want help because they know I do.” A relative told us, “They ask her as much as she can understand. She’ll tell them if she doesn’t like something.”

A healthcare professional stated, “The residents I have spoken to consistently report they are happy living there. Several new residents have expressed that they have settled in well and feel much happier in this home compared with their previous placements.”

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.

People had access to a range of healthcare professionals and received co-ordinated care and support. One person said, “They care about you. They make a fuss about things you wouldn’t even think about. I had a sore ankle, and they got in some cream they didn’t have here. That’s caring for people.”

A healthcare professional stated, ‘The manager and staff demonstrate a collaborative approach, maintaining good links with external health professionals to support residents’ wellbeing.’ The manager said any changes to people’s care and support needs were recorded in care plans which staff could access via a handheld device. Any changes to people’s care plans were flagged so staff could see them easily. Changes to people’s care needs were also communicated in handover meetings which occurred at the end of the day and night shifts.

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

Examples of how people’s communication needs were met included how staff would support someone with a sensory impairment. One person had poor eyesight, so staff would identify themselves when they came to their room. This person liked things to be left in the same place so they would not have trouble finding anything or have problems navigating round their room. Staff told us they supported people to wear their glasses and checked people wore their hearing aids.

Care plans documented people’s communication needs. For example, 1 person had memory issues, so staff needed to be patient and clear when communicating with them. Information was provided in an accessible format, for example, the chef showed us a file which included pictures of dishes which could aid people’s understanding of what they could choose to eat. We did not see staff use this file when asking people about their food choices in the lounge before lunch, and later for their evening meal.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care and support. However, the system for recording complaints, actions and outcomes lacked detail.

Complaints were logged on the provider’s system, although it was not clear what actions were specifically taken to remedy the issues recorded. The log we reviewed stated, ‘Complaint resolved’ or ‘Responded in due time to the family, provided further information.’ It was not possible to understand the detail of complaints raised and how lessons were learned as a result.

People knew how to make a complaint if they had any concerns. One person said, “I would speak to one of the helpers.” A relative told us, “I would speak to the manager, and now they’ve got a deputy.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care and support they needed when they needed it. People’s diverse needs were catered for.

People’s care and support was accessible, timely and in line with best practice and legal requirements. For example, signage around the home enabled people to find their way around.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care and support in response to this.

Staff completed training in equality and diversity. One staff member explained their understanding and said, “It’s about respecting people and providing them with a good quality of care. It’s respecting where people come from, their religion and their community.”

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.

Care plans included people’s wishes in relation to end of life planning. Some people had completed a Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) with support from healthcare professionals. ReSPECT is a summary of people’s preferences gathered through conversations with healthcare professionals, families and people. It records personalised decisions such as whether or not to attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to ensure the person’s wishes are known and followed in an emergency when they cannot speak for themselves.

Staff were trained in end-of-life care. The manager told us, “We work in partnership with the district nurse team. Some people have clear ideas of what they want; we need to make sure conversations are not scary or anxiety filled. I’m starting to try and do yearly family meetings and that can be one of my points, to share ideas too.”