Acorn 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 assessment of 13 August 2019, 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 68 (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 mostly 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. We observed people received care that was person-centred, staff were able to accurately describe what and who was important to people and how they liked to be supported. Although most staff knew people well, care records did not include person-centred details to ensure all staff were aware of people’s wishes and needs. People were asked if they had a preferred gender of staff to support them, preferences were mostly adhered to. However, 2 relatives told us sometimes their family members were supported by a mix of genders despite stating a choice.

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 received training and experiences to help them understand the challenges the people they supported may face. This included an immersive dementia experience which is designed to help staff understand people living with dementia and techniques to support them. Additional support was sought from mental health professionals and professionals who specialised in supporting people living with dementia.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The Accessible Information Standards were met by the provider. Information available to people was adapted to meet their needs. For example, menus and activity schedules were in a pictorial format, large print and translated documents could also be created. A staff member told us about how they supported a person who was registered blind and said they read allowed to them. A monthly newsletter was provided to people and their relatives to showcase what had happened within the month and advise on upcoming events.

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 provider’s complaints policy was accessible; we saw complaints were addressed and logged allowing the registered manager to identify any trends and patterns. Learning from complaints was taken forward and cascaded to the staff to minimise reoccurrence. A relative told us, “No complaints. I mentioned about a person who went into people’s rooms and took things. The home tried but the person was very mobile and very chatty. The issue was addressed by staff and the person’s behaviour and issues improved.” People told us they would direct any complaints to the nursing team or registered manager.

The provider made sure that people could access the service and the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The provider had made improvements and adaptations the service to promote accessibility for people. Consideration had been given to the décor to ensure it met the needs of people living with dementia. People were able to recognise their personal space as their bedroom doors were painted brightly with their photograph and name displayed. There was dementia friendly signage around the service to help people identify communal spaces and bathrooms. An audit for seating had been completed and specialist chairs had been purchased to enable people to sit out comfortably and safely. A patio area was available which we saw people freely use.

Staff and leaders 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 gave examples of success stories where they had advocated for people at risk of barriers to care. People were supported by different teams,. For example, the Dementia and Older People’s Mental Health Service and the Dementia Crisis Team. Visiting health care professionals spoke highly of the support staff offered. A healthcare professional told us, “I have observed staff to be attentive to residents, offering support promptly and appropriately when needed. Their approach is person-centred and respectful, helping residents to feel valued and secure.”

People were not always 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’s end of life wishes were not always documented in their care records. Decisions such as Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and other formal documents were in place and care plans contained practical and clinical arrangements. However, person-centred details and wishes were not included to inform staff details of how a person wished to be supported holistically.