Blandford 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 service met people’s needs.

The last rating for this key question was 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.

People received person-centred care which met their needs and reflected their preferences. People told us they were happy with the support they received. People had been supported to try new things and develop their skills and independence. People received support with their physical and mental health. Each person had a key member of staff who helped them plan and review their care. Some people’s mental wellbeing had improved because of increased activities and social engagement.

The provider supported people to integrate in the local community. They had sourced several different social clubs which people regularly attended. Staff supported people to access community health services. People took part in a range of activities outside of the home and had developed friendships with people living in other care settings in the local community. Comments from people included, “I go to the library, a women’s group and meet up with friends. We talk about things that are important to us.”

People were given information about the service and their care. People told us they were well informed by staff. The provider produced some documents in an easy-to-read format. Everyone using the service was able to read and understand normal text but the easy-to-read information helped to give additional clear messages. Staff undertook training about communication and sensory impairments to make sure they knew how to enhance communication with people. We saw staff speaking slowly and clearly with people and allowing them time to process what they had been told.

The provider had systems to listen to people and involve them in decisions about their care and the service. People had regular meetings with staff and each other so they could share their views. There was an appropriate complaints procedure. An easy-to-read version of this was on display in communal areas. People told us they knew how to make a complaint and what to do if they wanted to discuss their care. They explained their views were respected and concerns were appropriately dealt with.

Staff supported people to access services within and outside the home. The provider had adapted the environment to meet the needs of people with restricted mobility. They supported people to take part in worship and to access services in the community. Staff helped people to arrange transport when they needed to travel longer distances. Staff supported people to attend healthcare appointments and organised for external professionals to visit the service when people were unable or unwilling to attend healthcare services. The provider had liaised with commissioners to secure extra funding for people to have increased staff support when they identified this was needed.

The provider had systems to protect people’s human rights and make sure their needs were met. Staff undertook training about equality and diversity. Staff respected people’s independence, choice and privacy when providing support with personal care. People’s ethnicity, culture and individual needs were planned for.

The provider helped people to plan for the future. People met with staff and managers to discuss personal goals and objectives. These were regularly reviewed.