Eastern Lodge

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

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’s care and support was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Staff consistently involved people, their relatives, and relevant health and social care professionals when assessing and reviewing people’s needs. A relative told us, “We do things together, we plan together.” Care records contained clear updates on people’s care, health and wellbeing. This approach enabled staff to get to know people well and support them effectively.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and support with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

Staff sought and implemented nationally-recognised guidance and recommendations in the planning and delivery of care, including guidance from speech and language therapists for a person who was at risk of choking. We also found evidence of staff supporting a person to follow safe moving and handling instructions provided by an occupational therapist, while the person required encouragement to accept the guidance.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people.

Staff worked closely with health and social care professionals, such as occupational therapists, GPs, social workers and care coordinators, to ensure people received appropriate care and achieved positive outcomes. Staff kept a clear and comprehensive log of all involvement from external teams. Through this collaboration, people received specialist support while their care remained consistent and well-coordinated.

Staff worked as a team, supporting each other to deliver care that was safe and responsive to people’s needs.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Staff supported people to attend healthcare appointments, monitored their health needs effectively and reported concerns promptly. There were clear records of appointments and health and wellbeing reviews. A relative told us staff supported them and their loved one to attend a dental appointment arranged in advance, which helped the person feel prepared and remain calm.

People had access to sufficient food and drink and were supported to be involved in food preparation where appropriate. Staff understood people’s health needs and any associated risks, such as diabetes, and encouraged healthy eating while respecting people’s choices. We observed people had access to a variety of meals, including fresh fruits and vegetables. A relative told us, “[Person] has freshly cooked meals; [person] eats well.” A staff member said, “We provide nutritious food and follow doctor's advice.”

The provider monitored people’s health, care, and wellbeing to drive continuous improvement, ensuring outcomes were positive, consistent, and met both professional standards and people’s expectations.

Staff routinely reviewed people’s care and wellbeing, including on a monthly and quarterly basis. Reviews focused on key areas, including health, communication, choices and preferences, safety, and risks. Key workers engaged with people regularly to capture their views, which informed these evaluations. We observed key working logs showing discussions about matters affecting people’s daily lives, alongside reminders about healthy choices and accessing support. Staff evaluation reports were comprehensive and person-centred, highlighting both areas where people were doing well and where additional support was needed. There was clear emphasis on people’s views, their wishes and goals, how staff supported them with daily challenges, and the steps taken to maximise their quality of life.

A relative commented on the progress their loved one has made since they had started using the service. They said, “I saw positive changes in [person]” and “You can see the improvement as time went by.” This highlighted the provider’s commitment to a person-centred approach in monitoring and improving people’s experiences and outcomes.

The provider informed people about their rights regarding consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. However, there was limited assurance that mental capacity assessments were consistently completed and that people’s decisions were always acted upon.

Staff sought people’s consent before providing care and respected their views and preferences.

Care plans contained information on people’s mental capacity. However, capacity assessments were not always decision-specific, and outcomes were not clearly recorded. Without decision-specific assessments and clearly recorded outcomes, there is a risk that some decisions may not be fully documented, which could affect continuity and clarity of care planning. For 1 person, their care records contained conflicting information regarding their position on DNACPR (Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation). This meant we were not assured that the person’s wishes were clearly recorded and consistently reflected across their care records. We discussed this with the provider, who confirmed they would review and update the records accordingly. Following the assessment, the provider told us they had updated people’s mental capacity assessments.