Spencers 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 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. The provider had systems in place to ensure people were involved in planning and reviewing their support as much as they were able and wanted to be. Two people told us how they spoke with staff about their support plans and described how things had changed when they wanted them to. A person told us, “I talk about what I want and they (staff) help me do it.”

Records showed support plans were reviewed regularly and updated when there were any changes in a person’s needs or wishes. Relatives and those important in people’s lives were involved in planning and reviewing support where people wanted or needed them to be.

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 worked closely with other services and professionals to ensure people received co-ordinated and consistent support which met their individual needs. Care and treatment pathways provided by other services and professionals had been integrated into people’s support plans which were regularly reviewed and updated.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People’s communication needs had been assessed and planned for. Information was provided in a variety of formats such as, words, pictures, symbols and by using objects of reference in line with the Available Information Standard (AIS). This is a legal requirement for organisations providing health or social care services which aims to ensure that people with disabilities, impairments, or sensory loss receive information in formats they can understand.

The registered manager and staff understood and followed legal requirements related to protecting and the sharing of people’s personal information.

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. We saw staff skilfully using people’s preferred methods of communication to offer choices, gather their views and opinions and assure them they were listened to. One example was a person speaking with staff about their afternoon activity. The person used their own version of a sign language. Staff responded to the person using their version and the person appeared happy and satisfied they had been listened to and understood.

Records showed people were involved in regular meetings to discuss, for example menus, events and any changes in the service.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff clearly understood people’s needs and the barriers they may face accessing external services. For example, people had health passports which set out how they communicated and how their support needs were met. This enabled other professionals to provide care and treatment in a more accessible and person-centred way. Specialised transport was available for people to access, for example, health related appointments or social engagements if they could not use public transport or ordinary vehicles.

The home environment was accessible for the people who lived there. Ground floor accommodation and facilities were available for people who required support with, for example, their mobility or sensory needs and communal spaces could accommodate any equipment people needed. Signage was in place to help people move around the building and access things, for example, in kitchen cupboards more independently. There was also accessible outdoor space for people to enjoy.

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. The registered manager and staff worked to ensure people received the support they were entitled to and which supported their rights in line with the Equality Act (2010). Records showed people’s support was personalised and took account of all aspects of their life. We saw where reasonable adjustments had been made to enhance people’s experiences and support good outcomes. An example of this was making staff available to support a person throughout a stay in hospital so their holistic needs could be met in the right way. During our assessment we also saw how staff spoke up for people if they did not receive services in the way they were entitled to, such as timely access to healthcare services.

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. The registered manager and staff were aware of the importance of supporting people to plan for their future. One person’s support plan included their long-term goal of wanting to move to more independent living. The registered manager told us they were looking at the best ways to address sensitive subjects, such as how people wanted to be supported at the end of their lives. Conversations had begun with people where appropriate, and those important in their lives regarding this subject.