Archived: Tollington Lodge Rest 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 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.

Staff ensured 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.

The home’s atmosphere was relaxed. People could move around their home as they wished. Drinks and snacks were readily available to people. People could choose where they wanted to eat their meals and if they wished to take part in the activities on offer. They could also choose to take part in activities within a group or on their own in their own bedrooms. Staff engaged with people, supporting them to do as they wished. Where support was needed, this was provided with consideration of the person’s ability, staff listened to, encouraged and involved people.

Staff understood the principles of person-centred care. One staff member said, “We always try to accommodate the residents wishes in the way they want. We follow residents leads for their routines, but also know sometimes this changes, for example they may want to stay up later than usual."

All staff 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 care and treatment was well coordinated between the service and healthcare professionals. A health professional told us, “Each person is supported well and managed as an individual”.

Staff received an induction which included shadow shifts working alongside an experienced staff member. This enabled them to get to know people and their support needs. When people had specific guidelines in place for example when they followed a modified diet or used specific equipment staff had received training and were confident to support people. One staff member told us, “I was shown how to use all equipment with the manager, there were shadow shifts for everything.”

Relatives were kept updated when there were any changes in people’s needs. One relative said, “Staff tell me how they are, they ring if there’s an issue, they get the doctor in and let us know, when we come, they talk to us."

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People were provided with a service user guide when they moved into the service. This provided information about people’s rights and choices and the facilities and services available to them.

Care plans contained detailed information about people’s communication needs and any tools they used. Staff told us they had received training on people’s specific communication needs. We observed staff using 1 person’s preferred method of communication with them.

Newsletters shared information with people on recent home activities.

The registered manager told us additional tools were also in place for staff who required them to support their learning styles.

People were encouraged and supported 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 a complaints policy. At the time of our inspection, they had not received any complaints. Staff recorded compliments; we viewed positive compliments received from people and their families.

Service leaders did not hold resident meetings. The registered manager told us they had been trialled but were not successful. Instead, a senior carer spent time with each resident individually, gathering and recording their views. People told us they were involved in decisions and could raise things as they wanted. Comments included, “No meetings, but the carers ask about what we think” and “If I wanted anything changed, I would talk to the manager, they would be up here straight away.”

Regular surveys were sent out to people and their relatives to gain their views on their care, from this the provider identified areas for improvement to enhance service quality.

Staff knew how to report any concerns or complaints they received from people or relatives. One staff member told us, “They can tell one of the carers and we will hand this over to the manager."

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

Care plans recorded people’s mobility, communication and sensory needs and any reasonable adjustments required to ensure they had equal access to services. The provider had an on-call system for staff if they required support out of office hours.

Support for people outside of the home was not usually included in people’s care packages, this was explained in the service user guide. This meant people rarely spent time outside of the home, unless they were supported by their family or friends.

Where people’s care packages included 1 to 1 staff support for community activities this was provided, and people could choose how to spend their time in the community.

An activity coordinator involved people in activities within the home on specific days and times and an exercise session for people was held weekly.

Health professionals told us the service ensured people could access treatment if needed. One professional said, “They appropriately raise concerns having done some basic testing initially. Communication is good between us, and they always involve us with any clinical concerns."

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.

The service had an equality and diversity policy. People’s protected characteristics, were known and respected by the staff supporting them. People’s health and welfare needs were being met. For example, moving and handling equipment was available to people and people had been supported to move bedrooms or add additional seating space where this would improve their experience of living in the home.

Visitors were welcomed at any time. Relatives told us, “We can come in whenever we want” and “Family can visit, we find somewhere quiet and have a cup of tea.”

A choice of drinks and snacks were always available for people and staff to help themselves to.

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.

People had advanced planning care plans. Where people had do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions, staff knew where to find this information and it was easily accessible. Staff told us, “The forms are clearly displayed in the electronic system to check instantly, we also have main information in a folder” and “They are easy to access and review."