The Lawrence

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 the person was at the centre of their care and treatment choices, and they decided, in partnership with the person, how to respond to any relevant changes in their needs. Care plans contained clear risk assessments and considered people’s capacity, choices, and preferences. Risk assessments had been completed for each person. This enabled staff to support and care for people in a way that was important to them, valuing and respecting their wishes.Each person had individualised personal emergency evacuation plans in place. This helped to keep people safe in an emergency. Staff knew people’s needs well and how much care and support they required. People knew if their needs changed, they could request for more or less support. Our observations of staff supporting the people confirmed staff had a person-centred approach.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported people’s choices and preferences. People said they had access to a support from a range of health and social care providers when needed. The service worked with commissioners to ensure continuity of care was managed. Staff understood people’s diverse needs, which ensured they were more able to help people experience joined up care. The team was consistent with no temporary staff working at the service and this meant staff had built good levels of rapport and trust with people which resulted in people being confident and relaxed with the team.The service encouraged people to set meaningful goals and focus on where they wanted to be in their lives. The managers shared examples of where people had progressed in different way.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. There were pictorial menus at the service, and the provider’s service user information leaflet was in an easy read format. Staff knew people’s communication needs. Staff told us 1 person communicated better when they used picture cards, whereas others communicated better with simpler words and shorter sentences. We did not see any easy read signage around the building that would help navigate people around the home. The manager took prompt action to address this and started looking at signage suitable for the home.

Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. People and those close to them were supported to understand and raise concerns or make complaints when this was needed. Staff knew people well and said they would recognise if someone was not happy with any aspect of their care. People told us they were able to raise any concerns or complaints to the staff team and felt comfortable to do so.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff received training in equality and diversity, they told us they supported people to live their lives in the best way possible for them. Staff supported people to access services in a timely way, and processes were in place to ensure people did not experience any barriers in accessing care and support.

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 management team and staff understood the needs of people with a learning disability and autistic people and worked hard to ensure typical barriers faced by people were removed or mitigated against. People and relatives told us they were treated fairly, and their rights were respected. Staff had access to various ways of raising concerns about treatment which discriminated. Staff training, guidance and spot checks meant staff were consistently reminded of their responsibilities. People told us they were very happy with the care they received and enjoyed living at The Lawrence.

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.This was an ongoing process, and people could add to this if they wanted to. The service was not supporting anyone at the end of their lives at the time of our assessment. The provider had an end-of-life policy in place that would guide them if they were to care for someone who was reaching the end of their life.