Hazelwood Lodge Limited

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 service met people’s needs.

At our last assessment 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 79 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People received care that was personalised and reflected their needs,preferencesand interests. Care plans included information about people’s routines, communication needs,interestsand the support theyrequired. This helped staff provide care in a way that was specific to each person.

Staff used their knowledge of people to adapt care and support in day-to-day practice. During our inspection, weobservedstaff addressing people by their preferred names and showing they understood people’s routines, communicationstylesand levels of independence. Staff recognised when people needed reassurance or encouragement and adjusted their approach accordingly.

People were supported to take part in activities and opportunities that were meaningful to them. Weobservedthat people’s bedrooms were personalised and reflected individual preferences. People also had access to spaces that supported their interests, including a garden that had been developed toprovidedifferent opportunities for engagement and enjoyment. Staff and leaders spoke with people about what mattered to them, which showed people’s views were considered in how care and support was planned and delivered.

A person confirmed they had been supported to use music as a way of managing anxiety and expressing their emotions. Staff had recognised that music was important to the person and arranged for them to take part in sessions with a local music studio, both online and face to face. The person was supported to create songs about their experiences and emotional journey. Thisdemonstratedperson-centred care because staff hadidentifiedan individual interest and used this to support the person’s confidence, emotionalwellbeingand self-expression.

People weresupported to build confidence and independence in the community. Staff worked with people through individual activity plans to support them to use public transport with staffassistance. People were supported to follow religious and spiritual routines that were meaningful to them, including attending places of worship. Relatives told us they were involved in discussions about people’s care and were kept informed when changes were made. They also described how staff adapted activities and outings to reflect people’s individual preferences and abilities.

The provider supported people to experience continuity of care as their needs changed. Care plans included information about people’s routines, preferences and support needs, so staff had guidance about how to provide consistent care.

Staff shared information with each other during the day and worked in a coordinated way. During our inspection, we observed staff communicating about people’s needs and responding promptly when assistance was required. This helped ensure people received consistent support.

Relatives told us they were involved in planning aspects of people’s care and felt staff were flexible when changes were needed.

Staff liaised with external professionals so people could access the services and support they required.

The provider made information available to people and their relatives about the service and people’s care. Relatives told us staff and managers communicated with them regularly about their family member’s wellbeing and were approachable when they wanted updates or clarification.

Communication with relatives took place in different ways, including regular conversations and newsletters. These helped relatives stay informed about events, activities and developments within the home. We also saw feedback documents which showed relatives had been asked for their views about the service.

Relatives told us they felt able to share feedback and raise questions when needed. A relative said, “Yes, we are asked about feedback often and I can just call the registered manager and give him any feedback at any time.”

The provider involved people and their relatives in decisions about care and the wider service. People were supported to make choices about their daily routines and how they spent their time. Relatives told us staff asked for their views, listened to feedback and used this to help shape support.

There were systems to gather and respond to feedback. Relatives told us they knew how to raise concerns and felt confident these would be taken seriously and addressed appropriately. The provider had a complaints procedure in place, which supported people and relatives to speak up when needed.

The provider supported people to access care, treatment and community services when these were needed. Staff helped arrange healthcare input, including GP involvement and specialist support, and relatives told us they were kept informed about appointments and outcomes.

Staff considered people’s individual needs before they accessed new places or services. Relatives told us staff checked whether environments were suitable and accessible, so people could attend safely and comfortably.

Staff worked with external professionals and organisations to reduce barriers to access. This helped ensure people could access healthcare and community opportunities in a way that reflected their needs.

The provider promoted equity in people’s experiences and outcomes. Staff completed training in equality and human rights, and the provider had procedures to support diversity and inclusion. The provider had also developed a diversity strategy which considered the experiences of people using the service and staff.

Care plans included information about people’s individual needs, backgrounds and lifestyle choices. This helped staff provide support that reflected people’s preferences and protected characteristics.

Relatives told us people’s rights were respected and that staff considered cultural and religious needs where required.

People were supported to plan for future changes in their care and support. Staff worked with healthcare professionals when people’s health declined or their needs changed. Care plans were reviewed and updated so they reflected people’s current needs and how staff should support them, including when people required end of life care.

Relatives told us staff involved them in discussions when people’s circumstances changed and remained flexible in how support was provided. The provider also described using advance care planning to help ensure people’s future wishes, care goals and changing health needs were considered. Where appropriate, this involved relatives, staff and healthcare professionals, including GPs, so decisions could be made in a planned and coordinated way.

Staff worked with other professionals to consider how people should be supported if their health deteriorated. This included planning care to reduce unnecessary or unwanted hospital admissions where this reflected the person’s needs and wishes. This helped ensure people and those important to them were involved in planning future care and support.