Lilibet House

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 provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good.

This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

We were provided with feedback from relatives and staff from other organisations which showed how happy service users were during there “holidays “at Lilibet House. For example a relative said “being non-verbal it’s hard to tell sometimes but (person) arrived home happy and relaxed and seemed to miss the attention of his carers at Lilibet.”, and “although (person) has only been staying at Lilibet for a short time I can already see (person) is very comfortable going and seems to enjoy time there, I was extremely nervous about (person) staying away from home and the manager was amazing with us when we started the process, all the staff are so lovely when I ring and see how (person)is. The service has given us the break we desperately needed.”

We observed staff treated service users with dignity during our out of hours visit.

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Several relatives highlighted the warmth of staff interactions and the trusting relationships developed. One said, “They’re not just a number to them. I don’t have to worry — I know (persons) fine.”

Care plans were developed alongside people and families in order that care provided was a continuity of the care they received at home. This meant people received support that was tailored to individual needs in a person-centred way. Relatives told us, “(Person) and ourselves were fully involved with all care planning and risk assessments. Staff read the care plan. They really do understand (person) and have really bonded with (person).

We observed a service user taking part in activities chosen by them.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Relatives were positive about the support in place for their family members to maintain their independence during stays at Lilibet House. Relatives we spoke with told us people could plan their bedtimes and waking, what to wear and how to spend their day. We observed in care plans service users’ individual routines and how changes to routine may affect them.

People felt their individual choices and preferences were respected by staff. Care plans we reviewed had clear information on people’s preferences, wishes and feelings. Staff we spoke with understood the importance of respecting these and enabling people’s independence where they could.

Staff we spoke with gave examples of supporting service users independence in line with individual ability. Examples included supporting service users to make drinks, choose meals, put on their shoes, hoover, or make snacks.

This meant peoples independence was promoted.

The provider 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.

Relatives told us, "(Person) adores Lilibet and we are more than happy, because they are stars!"

"They know (person) inside out and are so nice to (person). They even helped (person) with a situation when (person) came home from respite."

Staff understood the importance of responding promptly to people and ensuring they explained choices clearly, in ways that people could understand. Staff we spoke with explained how they were responsive and kind where people exhibited distress.

Some people were living with a complex health and mental health conditions that hindered them communicating when their mood was deteriorating. We saw records showing staff identifying and raising these concerns to ensure people received the help they needed. For example, staff recorded and monitored periods of distress or frustration and had clear guidance how people wished to be supported. This included distraction and de-escalation techniques that were engaging and meaningful to a person before they reached a crisis point. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s triggers and their preferred methods for support with de-escalation which kept people safe.

Staff offered several examples of meaningful, compassionate support. For example, supporting a new service user at bedtime, “offering reassurance and singing a familiar church song.” Or when “we created a positive atmosphere by playing a person’s favourite music to lift their mood, leading to a group disco in the lounge.”

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff wellbeing was a priority at Lilibet House. Staff gave feedback about the support they received from the management team. One staff member told us, “They are both very approachable and kind people.”

Staff felt supported to bring the best of themselves to work each day. Staff said, “they felt comfortable raising concerns or ideas, and that managers acted on suggestions.” They valued the leadership team’s approachability and willingness to help.