Philia Lodge Rest Home

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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (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. We found some aspects of care plans required review, to ensure they were fully reflective of people’s needs and what was normal for them. However, the manager had already undertaken many reviews since being in post, was aware of the further work required, and had planned for this to be completed. Although some care plans did require review, we found staff provided care which met people’s needs.

People told us they were happy with the care they received, and staff knew them well. We found although care plans did require some updates, they mostly were person centred and reflected people’s preferences, life histories and wishes. We observed staff engaged with people about their life histories, and held meaningful conversations, which people responded positively to.

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. There was a consistent staff team in post, and relatives told us they enjoyed getting to know staff, and felt it was positive to see familiar staff when they visited.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish continuity of care. This included when people moved between different services. People’s relatives told us staff had made referrals to health and social care professionals when required, including seeking specialist equipment where appropriate. Staff were confident in obtaining assistance for people, this included GP reviews and emergency care. Staff told us they could contact the GP at any time, and GP visits to the care home took place. We observed health professionals visited the service and people’s records were updated following their visit.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Where people required support with communication, this was recorded within their care plan.

Staff knew people well, and this meant they adapted their communication style to meet individual needs. For example, we saw staff were mindful of people’s sensory needs, and appropriate verbal or physical guidance was provided where needed. Staff considered varying approaches to communication where people’s first language was not English, this included using gestures, key phrases and visual aids. Staff also told us they had access to interpreter services and other technology. We observed staff used these approaches during our assessment and they sought further information and guidance from external resources and people’s relatives when required.

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 and their relatives told us they were confident to approach the manager and staff with any questions, queries or concerns. People and their relatives said they would be listened to, and appropriate action would be taken. Relatives told us they had noted positive change at the care home, and in communication, since the new manager had been in post.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The care home environment was accessible for the people who used the service. People had been supported to access external health care services appropriately. This included attending appointments in the community, or arrangements were made for healthcare professionals to visit people at the care home.

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. Staff had completed relevant training to help make sure they understood and were able to meet people’s different needs, this included training in equality, diversity and human rights.

We saw staff knew the people they supported well. Each person had a care plan, and although some reviews and updates were required, this was planned and underway. Staff demonstrated effective communication with one another which ensured the support they provided was tailored to people’s individual needs.

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.

Staff recognised the need for care and support to be led by people’s wishes. Sensitive conversations about future care were held, where appropriate, with people and their relatives.