Sherwood Lodge Independent Healthcare

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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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.

Care and support were consistently person centred. People told us staff were kind and patient, and relatives were positive about individual staff members. One relative told us, “The staff are kind and caring. There’s staff that have known [Name] since [Name] was a youngster. They always come across as nice.” A staff member added, “We know every tiny detail about people. We are like their family. I really miss them when I’m not here.”

In conversations with staff, it was clear they knew people well. They shared examples of people’s interests, strengths, dislikes and stressors. When talking about how people expressed their distress, one staff member said, “We manage it because we know people so well. For example, there's one person who can get agitated in the evenings, but we know the signs and because we pick those up early, we can usually settle things with a cup of tea.”

Staff were passionate about the service, and many had worked there for several years. Staff ensured people received personalised care which reflected their individuality and experienced a good quality of life. Professionals all gave positive feedback about this. Comments included, “The staff know everyone very well and many have lived there for many years. I have always seen them being treated appropriately and respectfully and in a calm manner”, “I have observed person-centred care and staff who I have come across have all been helpful and compassionate towards residents, treating them with respect and dignity” and “Encouragement, personal responsibility and autonomy is promoted.”

Care plans recorded people’s individual needs, preferences and what mattered most to them. They were holistic and included information about people’s physical, emotional, social and psychological needs. Care plans were very regularly reviewed to ensure they continued to reflect each individual’s needs and wishes and information was shared in a way that people understood.

The provider had a good understanding of the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Staff told us they worked closely with other agencies to ensure people received the support they needed in a timely way. For example, with the local GP surgery and specialist health teams. The registered manager explained that people sometimes faced barriers when accessing care or in the local community. For example, when being admitted to hospital for physical health care. Hospital passports, strong advocacy and a consistent staff team helped to ensure people’s needs were understood and care was responsive.

Health and social care professionals gave positive feedback about the service’s communication and responsiveness. One professional told us, “They will escalate concerns to us as needed and follow plans that we have put in place regarding resident’s health. During follow-up calls information appears to be retained and staff seem to be aware of any plan in place and will undertake monitoring as requested.”

People were supported to engage in a wide range of meaningful activities, and regular events and celebrations promoted people’s independence, quality of life and wellbeing.

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

People’s communication needs were described in care records. This included information about their hearing, speech and vision, as well as non-verbal cues and how individuals communicated when they experienced different emotions. This helped staff understand the best approach to use with people in a range of situations. Some forms and information which was shared with people was provided in easy-to-read formats. Staff received training in communication and record keeping and knew how to put this into practice to meet individual needs.

The registered manager told us most people preferred verbal communication, and they were aware of the importance of clear and individualised information to ensure each person was fully informed.

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.

People who lived at the service had completed satisfaction surveys. Feedback was positive and the registered manager had reviewed these and the comments people made. People told us they would be able to share their views and ideas with staff at any time.

Staff involved people in decisions about their support wherever possible. Relatives said they would be happy to speak with the management team or staff if they had concerns or feedback. They were confident that any concerns would be listened to, investigated and responded to by the registered manager. One relative told us staff forgot to update them about a change regarding their relative, but apologised for this, and since then had been very conscientious about keeping them up to date. We saw complaints had been responded to promptly and outcomes shared.

A complaints and compliments policy was in place, and we saw examples of compliments which had been shared with the team.

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

The management team and staff were aware that people could be disadvantaged when accessing treatment and care. They were strong advocates for people and were passionate about ensuring individuals could access the services they needed without barriers or delay. One professional acknowledged that people sometimes faced barriers, but told us staff, “Really do try to fight for them to get the appropriate treatment and care.”

Care records contained information about people’s needs including details such as mobility, sensory or behavioural needs. These were clear and people were supported by staff who knew them well. This helped staff to effectively support people with their individual needs and make reasonable adjustments where necessary.

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

Managers and staff understood their responsibilities in ensuring people’s treatment and support promoted equality, removed barriers or delays and protected people’s rights. Staff received training in equality, diversity and human rights, as well as specific subjects such as mental health awareness and safeguarding. This helped improve staff awareness of the needs of people with different protected characteristics and understand how best to support them.

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. One person had recently died at the service, and a professional gave positive feedback about the care staff had provided.

Some people had documents in their care records which sensitively but clearly outlined their end of life wishes. Key information such as music, flowers and clothing wishes was recorded. In some care plans it had been noted that the person did not wish to discuss end of life at this time. One person had a ‘living will’ in their care record which detailed when they would wish medical treatment to be given or withheld. Relatives told us they were aware of treatment or end of life arrangements which had been agreed.