Claydon Lodge Care 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 as 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.

People were not always supported to receive person-centred care that reflected their individual needs, preferences and involvement in decision-making.

People did not consistently receive appropriate support to maintain their personal hygiene and dignity. Feedback from relatives indicated that support with toileting was not always provided in a timely way, with some people reporting a reliance on continence wear and having to wait prolonged periods for assistance to use the toilet. This meant people's individual needs and preferences were not always responded to promptly. In addition, people and their relatives told us they were not routinely involved in reviewing their care, which reduced opportunities for care and support to be planned and adjusted in line with their wishes, choices and changing needs. These concerns demonstrated that person-centred approaches were not consistently embedded in practice.

Opportunities had been missed to enhance people’s orientation and independence, for example using contrasting colours and more personalised, easily identifiable bedroom doors. Overall, improvements were required to better enhance the environment and to provide an enabling environment for people living with dementia.
 

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.

People experienced continuity in their care and support. People told us they liked the staff who cared for them and felt they knew them well, which helped them to develop positive and trusting relationships. The service promoted consistency by ensuring people were supported by a regular team of staff wherever possible, enabling staff to understand people's needs, preferences and routines.

Staff had received training in dementia care, which supported them to provide appropriate care and respond to people's individual needs. Relatives told us they were kept informed of any changes in their family member's health and wellbeing, demonstrating effective communication and partnership working. Feedback and our observations showed that people generally received coordinated care from staff who understood their needs.
 

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People and those important to them were provided with accessible information to help them understand the service and make informed decisions about their care and support. We saw a range of easy-read signage, posters and leaflets displayed throughout the service, supporting people to access information in formats that met their needs and promoted independence.

Relatives told us information was routinely shared with them and that it was communicated in a way that was accessible and easy to understand. Feedback indicated people and their representatives were kept informed about relevant aspects of care and support.
 

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.

The service had processes in place to seek and act on people's views. The provider held resident meetings and distributed surveys, providing people with opportunities to share feedback about the care and support they received. The manager also operated an open-door policy, enabling people and their representatives to raise concerns, discuss issues and seek support when required. During our inspection, we observed the manager had developed a positive rapport with people and interacted with them in a warm and respectful manner.
 

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People had access to the mobility aids they required, helping them to maintain their independence and participate in daily activities. The service made reasonable adjustments are made to ensure equitable access for people with disabilities. This includes wheelchair-accessible facilities, hearing loop systems and support for people with sensory impairments.
 

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.

People experienced care and support that promoted equality, dignity and respect. People and their relatives told us they were treated fairly and did not experience discrimination. Feedback indicated staff treated people as individuals and respected their diverse backgrounds, needs and preferences.

The provider had an Equality and Diversity Policy in place to guide staff in delivering inclusive care. Staff also received equality and diversity training, helping them to understand their responsibilities in promoting people's rights and ensuring care was provided in a non-discriminatory way.
 

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 service supported people to consider and communicate their wishes for future care and support. People were given opportunities to discuss their preferences regarding end-of-life care and future planning. Where people did not wish to engage in these discussions, staff respected their choices and care records reflected this appropriately.

We found that people's preferences and decisions were documented where these had been shared, and relatives were involved in discussions and decision-making where appropriate and in line with people's wishes. This helped to ensure that future care planning was person-centred and reflected people's views, values and preferences.