Pinetree Lodge

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the service involved people andtreated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. At the last inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this. 

This service scored 80 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. People consistently told us staff were “nice, caring, kind and helpful,” and we observed warm, patient and unhurried interactions throughout the home. Relatives described staff as empathetic and sensitive, particularly during difficult conversations about deteriorating health or emotional distress. Staff knew people well and spoke fondly about them, which helped build trusting relationships. People felt valued and respected as individuals, and staff were attentive to maintaining people’s privacy and personal preferences. Although activity levels varied, people told us they felt safe and comfortable with staff, and they trusted them to meet their needs in a dignified way. A relative said, “Whilst “lucky” seems to be an odd word to use in the context of a dementia diagnosis I do now feel “lucky” that [person’s name] is in Pinetree Lodge rather than elsewhere.”

Staff treated people as individuals and made sure the care, support and treatment offered met their needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics. Staff demonstrated good knowledge of people’s likes, communication styles and health conditions and used this information to adapt their approach. People and relatives were consulted during assessments, and staff recognised what mattered most to individuals, including personal appearance, routines and cultural or religious needs. Relatives told us staff “knew them as a person” and took time to understand what helped people feel comfortable. While some relatives expressed frustration about inconsistent activity provision, they acknowledged that the care itself was person‑centred and respectful. Staff understood the difficulties people experienced with their concentration and focus so tailored activities to meet these specific needs. Overall, people experienced care that recognised and upheld their individuality.

Staff promoted people’s independence. They made sure people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. People were encouraged to do tasks for themselves where possible, with staff offering assistance only when needed. Records showed staff sought consent appropriately and worked within the Mental Capacity Act, including completing decision‑specific assessments and considering the least restrictive options. People had choice in areas such as food, daily routines and how they spent their time, and staff adapted the support they offered to reflect these choices. Relatives reported staff were proactive in discussing changes in needs and ensuring people received timely professional input when required. Although relatives felt opportunities to access outdoor space or structured activities were sometimes limited, people generally felt listened to and able to influence how their care was delivered.

Staff listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. We observed staff were responsive to individual’s needs and people confirmed this was the case. Staff were knowledgeable about each person and could describe their needs, including how any of their cultural needs were met.

The provider was exceptional at promoting workforce wellbeing and enabling staff to deliver high-quality, person-centred care. The senior management team monitored operational delivery to ensure staff well-being was maintained and they had adequate support to deliver the service. The senior management team were extremely responsive to staff concerns and listened closely to their feedback. Following changes in the Home Office guidance around requirements for international workers to remain in the UK, the provider acted quickly to resolve these and within 2 days had increased the base pay scale for all of the staff. They supported staff in a wide range of other areas such as salary sacrifice schemes, health benefits and early draw down of wages, which greatly benefited staff and improved their well-being. The people’s director also acted as an advocate in many national and governmental forums ensuring there was a fairness and equity of access across all benefit schemes.

Staff described feeling well supported by approachable managers who provided regular supervision and valued their contributions. One staff member said, “I find working for the company positive and supportive. I feel valued in my role as an operational support officer, and there’s a strong focus on providing good-quality, person-centred care. The organisation encourages teamwork, open communication, and continuous improvement, which makes it a good place to work.” Staff were encouraged and supported to complete 2 days a year as volunteers as the team found this gave people a sense of well-being. Recently the provider had been winners of a North East of England Excellence in Health and Wellbeing Award.