Chater Lodge

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 key question 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. Relatives described how their family members were provided with personalised care. A relative told us, “[Name] used to keep themselves to themselves but now they engage in a variety of activities and go out on day trips. Staff have found things that interest them,” and “[Name] has reduced appetite now so staff tempt them with finger foods and foods they know they like.” Care plans were mostly personalised but required further development to ensure staff had access to people’s specific requests, routines and preferences.

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. Staff had regular meetings with health professionals to review people’s changing needs and people were supported to access health services. The provider ensured clinical oversight, support and guidance was available for staff where required. Relatives told us they were kept updated with any changing health needs. People were supported to go out locally and visit places of interests and culture or do their shopping. The registered manager worked alongside a staff member who had established positive links with the local community, including groups who visited the service to meet with people. These included children’s groups and organised specialist talks. Topics included, understanding dementia and the development of will making. Staff supported people to access a range of activities that were designed to meet their emotional and physical needs, and provide meaningful stimulation.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People and relatives did not raise concerns about accessing information. People’s care plans provided guidance around how they communicated. However, there was lack of detailed guidance in terms of how people preferred to receive their communication. For example, large print or verbal or pictorial information. The registered manager was reviewing care plans following our site visit.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. People and relatives told us they felt comfortable to raise any concerns if they had them and felt these were listened to and acted on. A person told us, “I had an issue with a staff member being ‘rude’ when I first moved into the service a while ago. This was dealt with by the service and there hasn’t been any problems since.” The provider obtained people’s feedback through regular engagement and the appointment of a ‘resident ambassador’ who they could approach for assistance if they felt reluctant to approach staff with any issues or questions. They told us, “I have only been here a short time. I haven’t needed to give much help as people are mostly happy and the staff are wonderful.” We observed a resident meeting which was well attended by people with plenty of interaction. People were encouraged to share ideas and forward requests which demonstrated a genuine seeking of feedback and ideas.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Managers had good working relationships with local health professionals and knew how to contact the appropriate teams to support people when the need arose. People and relatives confirmed staff responded to changes in people’s needs and supported people to contact routine and specialist services when required. A relative told us, “Staff do communicate when anything has changed with [Name] or if they are unwell.”

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. A person described how staff arranged for them to use the mini bus so they could get to appointments and visits in the local community. A second person told us they felt many activities were more appropriate for people living with dementia and they felt left out. Staff had paired them up with a person with similar interests which gave them fulfilment and enabled them to pursue their hobbies. Staff advocated for people when liaising with services to ensure their views and needs were listened to.

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 those important to them were given the opportunity to discuss their end of life wishes and views. Care plans reflected where they had made those decisions. People were supported to identify outcomes where they chose to stay at the service for a short time, for example, to recover abilities in order to return to their own home.