Sagecare (Chesil 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 the provider met people’s needs. At our last inspection this key question was rated good. At this assessment the rating remains 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 told us they were involved in developing and reviewing their care plans. They said that they were happy with the quality and standard of the care provided. They told us that care was carried out in line with their preferences and complemented their everyday lives.

Staff understood people’s individual preferences and routines, telling us they were sensitive to let people take the lead and they followed their wishes. People’s care plans were concisely written and clearly documented the support needed with their personal care. Care plans set out the key tasks required at each care visit, and the preferred routines people wished to follow. Staff knew people well and responded promptly to minimise discomfort, concern, or distress. For example, if people were in pain, unwell or struggling with aspects of their everyday routines.

Care plans documented what was important to people, including details around their lives, family backgrounds, cultural beliefs and individuals important to them. Staff told us promoting people’s wellbeing was an important part of their role. They said if people were happy and comfortable, they would be more likely to engage with their care, leading to more positive outcomes around their health, wellbeing and independence.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity

People told us they received consistent care call times from regular teams of staff. They told us that staff stayed the full duration of their care visits and ensured all planned care tasks were completed. People told us they could request changes to their care and that the provider was flexible in adjusting to accommodate their wishes.

The provider had systems and processes to monitor delivered hours and maintain communication with people and their relatives regarding changing needs and funding requests. The provider organised care rotas to ensure people’s care visits were appropriately prioritised according to their needs. This included people who had time critical visits or more significant care needs. The provider had a good oversight of care rotas to identify where there were gaps in care rounds where additional visits could be scheduled. This helped them monitor and assess their capacity to take on new care packages.

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

People told us they were provided with the information about their care that they needed. For example, planned call times and designated staff. The provider had a good understanding of The Accessible Information Standards and had developed policies to ensure people received information in a format which they could access and understand. People’s communication needs were documented in their care plans. This included any adjustments required. For example, one person had difficulty with their hearing. Staff promoted effective communication by systems with written words and pictures. This helped to ensure the person could communicate their wishes. The provider was able to provide documentation in adapted formats such as, easy read, pictorial or in different languages. This helped to ensure information was accessible to all.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. The provider involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The provider had a complaints policy, which detailed how complaints would be handled. The manager demonstrated how they would listen to people’s feedback and act to ensure concerns were addressed. People told us senior staff listened and acted upon any feedback to quickly address any issues raised. They told us they were given the opportunity to give feedback about care and that changes were made in response to their requests.

The provider undertook quality assurance ‘Voice of Customer’ surveys with people and relatives to gain feedback about the service. The analysis of responses in November 2025 reflected positive feedback from people about staffing consistency, support to maintain independence, care planning, communication and the overall quality of care. Senior leaders reviewed feedback to help identify the strengths of the service and areas to improve. They involved staff in reflective feedback, to help ensure that people’s opinions were heard and understood by all.

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

The provider worked with people to ensure they had equity in access to healthcare services. For example, where people were reluctant to engage with services due to self-neglect, staff worked patiently and pro-actively to encourage and support them to access the services they needed. This helped to promote positive health outcomes.

The provider had equality and diversity policies, which had been developed in line with The Equality Act 2010.

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 told us they did not suffer any discrimination in relation to equity in access, experience or outcomes. Staff had received equality and diversity training. People’s care plans included details around people’s protected characteristics and how to ensure care was not a barrier to fair treatment.

Staff completed additional work to ensure that people had equal access to activities and social events held at the service. This included ensuring planned activities were culturally sensitive and inclusive. Staff ensured people who were not able to independently access activities had the opportunity to do so. For example, where people needed support from staff to access communal areas due to mobility or anxiety. This helped to ensure people had equal access to facilities and activities available.

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 provider engaged with people around their preferences and choices for their future care needs and arrangements. The manager told us they engaged in early and pro-active conversations with people around their preferences if they were to need support with end-of-life care. This helped to ensure that any advanced decisions were documented and respected. Care plans were reflective of people’s wishes and there were examples where people had been cared for towards the end of their life.