Lydia Rose Care

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

This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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 were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Leaders and staff described how care was built around people’s lives rather than service routines. They explained that flexibility was central to how care was planned and delivered, allowing support to adapt as people’s needs and aspirations changed. One staff member told us, “It’s about fitting around the person, not expecting the person to fit around us.”

Care was not task focused. Visit lengths were planned to allow time for meaningful interaction, conversation and relationship building. Care plans were personalised and reflected people’s individual preferences, routines and goals, guiding staff to deliver care in a flexible and responsive way. This helped staff understand people as individuals and respond to what mattered to them on a day‑to‑day basis. A person using the service told us they were “never rushed” and felt staff “take time to listen and understand my needs.”

Leaders and staff described how support focused on enabling people to develop skills, build confidence and have new experiences, rather than simply meeting basic needs. People were encouraged to make everyday choices and remain fully involved in decisions about their care and daily lives.

Families told us they felt their knowledge of the person was respected and used to shape care. They described care that was responsive, consistent and tailored, which supported positive outcomes and helped people maintain their identity and independence over time.

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 and families described care as consistent, flexible and well-coordinated. Families said continuity of carers helped people feel reassured and supported.

Staff told us they shared information effectively, so care was delivered consistently. Where people received input from other professionals, staff followed guidance and adapted support to ensure care remained joined‑up.

Feedback from people, families and staff showed barriers to care were reduced through continuity of carers, clear communication and flexible responses. One family member described the service as “well organised and joined‑up,” which supported confidence in the care provided.

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

People and families told us information was provided in ways they could understand. Families said staff explained who would be visiting and when, and kept people informed if anything changed.

Staff told us they were mindful of how information was shared and adapted their communication to suit individual needs, including using simple explanations and reassurance where needed.

One family member told us this communication “helps them [family member] feel prepared,” particularly where people felt anxious about changes.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. This involvement was ongoing and responsive, rather than limited to formal review points. Care was discussed regularly with people and, where appropriate, their families so support could be adapted as needs, preferences or circumstances changed.

Leaders described how people remained central to decision‑making and how flexibility was built into the service. The registered manager told us involvement was “ongoing, not just at three‑ or six‑monthly reviews,” which helped ensure care continued to reflect what mattered most to people.

Care was designed around people rather than the routines of the service. Leaders and staff described how carers were carefully matched, people’s preferences were respected, and visit lengths allowed time for meaningful interaction and relationship‑building, rather than being task‑focused.

Families described seeing positive changes over time. One family member told us, “I feel like I have got my mum back,” reflecting improvements in independence and wellbeing that had been meaningful for the person and those close to them.

A family member of a person with a learning disability told us they “always feel listened to and involved” in decisions about care. They said this helped their relative develop skills, have new experiences and live the life they chose.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People were able to access care when they needed it. Families told us staff were flexible and responsive when needs changed.

Staff described adapting visit timings and support arrangements to ensure people received care that met their needs, including where people needed extra reassurance or support at times.

One family member said staff “always try to accommodate what’s needed,” which helped ensure people had fair access to care.

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

People and families consistently described positive care experiences. Families said care felt reliable, respectful and personalised. Staff feedback aligned with this, with staff describing their commitment to ensuring people received the same quality of care regardless of their needs or circumstances, including for people with a learning disability.

One family member described the service as “a really good fit,” noting improved consistency in care and their relative feeling more settled compared to previous care experiences.

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.

People and families told us staff supported people to build and maintain their independence over time. Care plans showed how staff worked in a planned and gradual way to support improvements, helping people gain confidence and maintain skills.

Staff supported people to progress at their own pace, encouraging movement, mobility and independence safely. People also told us staff noticed improvements and responded positively. One person said staff “notice when I can do something I couldn’t before and encourage me,” which helped them feel more confident and motivated.

This showed people were supported to look ahead and maintain independence, with care focused on progression, confidence and quality of life rather than simply meeting immediate needs.