Tanglewood

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.

Relatives were positive about the support provided at Tanglewood and how it was tailored to meet people’s needs and preferences. They told us the service had worked with them to build a picture of people’s needs and ensure care was person-centred. One commented; “They really took note of everything down to what we ate for breakfast, behaviours, language, they captured everything.”
An external professional described staff as, ‘Friendly, approachable and inclusive, working collaboratively with resident’s family members.’
Care plans were detailed and contained information about people’s emotional well-being as well as any health needs. They were updated regularly to help ensure they remained relevant.
Each person had their own bedroom and bathroom. These were decorated to reflect their own tastes and preferences.
 

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 understood the different health and social needs of the people they supported. They used this knowledge to tailor care and respond to what each person needed. Staff worked closely with relatives and other services and shared information appropriately. The range of activities people engaged in meant they were able to build connections with the local community.
 

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

People’s preferred communication styles were known and understood by staff. Objects of reference were used to help people make choices.
Newly introduced capacity assessment pro formas recorded how people had been presented with information and given time to process it.
 

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.

People had assigned key workers who knew them well. They reviewed people’s care regularly to check what was working well and where changes needed to be made to improve people’s experiences.
There was an organisational complaints policy. This outlined the timeframes within which complaints would be dealt with. There was information on what to do if a complainant was not satisfied with the response. There were no ongoing complaints at the time of the inspection. Relatives told us they would raise any issues they had and would be confident they would be dealt with.
 

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

The service worked with other health care agencies to make sure people had access to external care and support as needed. People attended regular check-ups and screenings. No external healthcare professionals raised any concerns when asked for feedback during our assessment.
 

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.

Staff completed training in equality and diversity to understand and reduce inequalities that affected outcomes for people they supported. Equity of opportunities was embedded in the culture of the service, support was personalised to reduce the risk of unequal outcomes.
 

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.

Future planning focused on building people’s independence, broadening their experiences and helping them maintain meaningful relationships. Staff knew people well and used consistent, values based approaches to support personal growth and achievement over time.
No one was approaching the end of their life at the time of our inspection.