Lindisfarne Crawcrook

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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices, and people were not consistently involved in decisions about their day‑to‑day support.

People did not always experience person‑centred care in practice. Some relatives said care could be rushed, including one who said, “There is limited dignity when clothing or bedding is soiled and not changed promptly.” Some staff completed care tasks without explanation, which meant people were not always fully involved, informed or reassured during personal care. This reduced people’s ability to make choices in the moment and limited their sense of control.

Staff knew people’s routines and preferences, and some relatives described positive experiences. One relative said, “[Person] is thriving… they look well, eat well and are always clean and tidy.” Staff also described adapting their approach for people living with dementia.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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. Staff understood the individual barriers people faced, such as dementia, sensory impairment or reduced communication, and adapted their approach accordingly.

Managers ensured reasonable adjustments were in place, including the use of life‑history information, consistent staffing and adapted communication. One relative said, “Staff are friendly, caring and take time to get to know people,” which reflected wider feedback about warm, respectful interactions.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.