Re-Create Freedom

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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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.

People’s records, our observations and feedback received from people, relatives and staff demonstrated people were being provided with person centred care. People’s aspirations were included in their care plans, as were their preferences about how they wished to be supported.

The registered manager explained how people were central to the care provision, and their individuality and preferences were respected. This was confirmed by relatives. A relative told us, “[Staff] are centred around [family member] … [family member] has a good weekend, makes choices, and is happy to go.” Another relative told us, “The care provided is exceptional.”

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’s records identified people’s diverse needs, how they were met and staff had received training to meet these needs. A staff member told us they had a handover with the next staff on duty, such as night staff, to ensure they received any important information about the person and their stay at the service.

People had access to the local community during their visits and chose the activities they wished to participate in. A person told us, “I go to Ipswich, Felixstowe has lots of things, been bowling, to the funfair on the bus, I come for the weekend, choose what we are going to do on Friday, pick what we are going to eat and go shopping.” A relative told us, “The level of care and activities is excellent.”

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

People’s records included information about their communication needs and how they were met. Some people used cards which they could hand to staff to show their mood and how they were feeling. This supported to the staff to recognise potential distress when the person could not articulate it and take action.

Documents were provided in accessible formats where needed.

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.

There was a complaint procedure in place, and any concerns were acted on and used to improve the service. There was a guest book where people had commented on their stay at the service. In May 2026 a person had written, “I had a very wonderful time at Freedom,” and in April 2026 they had written, “Great time and activities 10 out of 10 stay.”

Relatives told us how their views had been listened to, such as the use of a communication book which the relative felt was helpful. A relative told us, “Any niggles, they are addressed.”

At the end of people’s stay they were asked for their views about the service they received. This was used to identify if any improvements were needed.

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

People were treated equally and made their decisions about how they wished to be cared for during their respite stay. People’s relatives booked the stays with the management team, and the staffing rota was developed to ensure there were staff available.

Where there were concerns relating to people’s presentation during visits, to reduce the risks of not being able to attend the service, the registered manager met with the person and their relatives to discuss how improvements could be made. This included asking people to consent to an agreement during their stay.

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 chose what they wanted to do during their stay, this included access to the community. The staff had worked with a local entertainment venue who had agreed to provide care staff with free tickets, which enabled people to access the shows without having to pay for staff as well as their own tickets.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future.

There were no people receiving care at the respite service who required end of life support. Care records identified who should be contacted in case of an emergency, should a person become ill during their stay.