Devon 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 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.

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.

Staff knew people well and adapted their support to reflect individual preferences, communication needs and behaviours. Throughout the inspection, we observed warm, respectful interactions and saw staff consistently adjust their approach to meet people's needs. This meant people received support that was tailored to them as individuals.

Staff reviewed and adapted support approaches when people's needs changed to ensure care remained personalised and effective. People's interests, routines and preferred activities shaped the support they received. We observed people engaging in activities they enjoyed, including sensory sessions, puzzles, walking, gardening and social activities. We also saw staff use familiar objects, songs and activities to encourage participation and meaningful engagement. This supported people to remain engaged in activities that were important to them and reflected their individual preferences and goals.

Staff responded to people's unique communication styles and preferences to maximise involvement in daily life. We observed staff using verbal communication, Makaton signs, visual prompts and personalised approaches to support interaction and choice. Makaton is a form of sign language.

Staff told us there was "no one-size-fits-all approach" and that care was always expected to be person-centred. Relatives and partners also spoke positively about the individualised nature of support, with a relative saying staff had involved a person to choose the colour of their room and another saying, "All staff know [Person] and they are good at what they do." This demonstrated people were supported in ways that reflected their individual needs, strengths 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.

The provider promoted continuity of care through consistent staffing and effective communication. Care plans reflected the involvement of relatives and staffing rotas demonstrated people were supported by staff who knew them well. Relatives commented positively on staff consistency, with 1 saying, "They have all been the same since [Person] has been there." This meant people received care from staff who understood their needs, preferences and routines.

Staff worked collaboratively with relatives and partner organisations to ensure care remained joined up. Relatives told us they were kept informed of changes and involved in care planning, with 1 relative describing their approach as a "joint fashion". Leaders also told us commissioners were invited to annual reviews and consulted when people's needs or support arrangements changed. This supported continuity of care and ensured decisions were made with input from those important to people.

Systems within the service helped ensure care remained coordinated and responsive. A key worker system was in place and staff worked effectively together throughout the inspection, providing support for one another and ensuring people continued to receive care without disruption. Staff adapted support arrangements to help people access community opportunities while maintaining continuity and reassurance. This demonstrated people received joined-up and flexible care that supported continuity, positive outcomes and their individual needs.

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

The provider made information accessible to people in ways that met their communication needs and reflected the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). Information was available in a range of formats, including easy-read documents, pictorial aids and symbol-supported communication tools. This meant people were supported to understand information, make informed choices and participate in decisions about their lives.

People had access to information that supported their daily lives and independence. During the inspection we saw pictorial menu choices, activity schedules, communication boards, "Now and Next" boards and easy-read guidance displayed throughout the service. Some people also had personalised step-by-step guides to support daily living tasks. This supported people to understand what was happening and participate in decisions about their day.

Staff had the skills and resources needed to communicate information effectively. Training records showed staff received guidance on meeting people's communication needs, and we observed a range of visual communication tools being used across the service. We noted personalised communication systems were available and adapted to individual preferences. Relatives told us they were kept well informed, with regular updates, newsletters and personalised information about their family member's activities. This demonstrated the provider promoted accessible communication and shared information in ways that supported people's understanding, involvement and independence.

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.

The provider had systems in place to seek feedback and respond to concerns. Complaints procedures were up to date and records showed concerns were investigated and addressed in a timely manner. For example, records demonstrated that a recent complaint had been responded to appropriately, with agreed actions implemented and the complainant satisfied with the outcome. This demonstrated people and those important to them could raise concerns and expect them to be addressed appropriately.

People and those important to them were actively involved in shaping the service. Regular residents' meetings enabled people to make decisions about day-to-day aspects of their lives, including choosing snacks, plants and decorations for events. Staff used easy-read information and visual resources to support participation in these discussions. This meant people were supported to express their views and influence decisions that affected them.

The provider also sought and acted on feedback from relatives and staff. Surveys were completed regularly, and action plans were developed to respond to themes and suggestions raised. Relatives consistently told us staff were approachable, listened to their views and kept them informed. One relative told us, "I did not feel left out at all, they listened to me," while another told us, "I feel they have listened." This demonstrated the provider valued feedback and used it to improve people's experiences.

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

The provider identified and responded to people's individual needs to ensure they could access services and support. Care plans considered reasonable adjustments and records showed people were supported to access health and social care professionals when required. This meant people could access the care and support they needed without unnecessary delays.

Staff worked proactively to remove barriers that could affect people's access to healthcare. Records showed reasonable adjustments were requested for people whose communication, sensory or other needs made some environments difficult to access. For example, 1 person was supported to attend appointments at a smaller local centre because busy hospital environments caused distress, while home visits were requested where people were unable to attend appointments. This reduced anxiety and supported people to access healthcare in a way that met their individual needs.

Relatives and staff told us people received support to access healthcare and maintain important relationships. One relative told us, "All of [Person's] medical needs are met in house. Professionals come to the home," while another described being able to visit family outside usual hours without difficulty. Staff also described supporting people to attend appointments and access services. This demonstrated people had equitable access to care, treatment and support tailored to their individual circumstances.

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 provider considered people's individual characteristics, needs and circumstances when planning care and support. Care plans also demonstrated how reasonable adjustments were made to help people achieve equitable outcomes. This meant people's individual needs were recognised and considered when planning support.

Staff adapted care and support to help people access services and opportunities that may otherwise have been difficult for them. One relative described how staff supported a person with significant anxiety to attend dental treatment requiring sedation by providing trusted staff members to support the appointment. The relative told us, "A couple of years ago we wouldn't have been able to do it, but [Person] trusts them and it was all fine." This reduced barriers to accessing healthcare and supported positive health outcomes.

The provider recognised that people experienced environments differently and adapted opportunities accordingly. Staff told us they had supported a person to attend church services and a learning disability church group that reflected the person’s beliefs and preferences. Staff also arranged alternative smaller events for people who may have found larger festivals overwhelming because of noise or crowds. This meant people could access meaningful activities and experiences in ways that met their individual needs and promoted inclusion.

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

The provider supported people to identify and work towards their future goals and aspirations. Care records included 12-month personal development plans and individual development plans which set out goals, actions, outcomes and review dates. This meant people received structured support to work towards goals and future outcomes that were important to them.

Staff worked with people and those important to them to plan for significant life changes. Records showed 1 person had been supported to experience an overnight stay away from home, despite finding unfamiliar environments and people challenging. The service worked closely with the person and their family to plan and support the experience, enabling the person to take part in new activities and increase their independence. This demonstrated people were given opportunities to develop confidence and prepare for future changes.

People were encouraged to think about and work towards their longer-term aspirations. We spoke with a person who described how staff supported their plans to move into supported living and pursue future educational opportunities. We also saw evidence of long-term goals being monitored and celebrated, including a visual plan displayed in 1 person's bedroom showing progress towards personal objectives. This meant people were supported to plan positively for their future and make informed decisions about their lives.