Spring Wood Lodge

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

This means we looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

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.

We observed staff interacting with patients in a discreet, respectful and responsive way. The provided patients with help, emotional support and advice when needed.

Staff supported patients to understand and manage their care, treatment or condition. Staff made every effort to include patients in their care and made sure that information was written in a way that people could understand it.

Patients said staff treated them well and behaved appropriately towards them. Staff understood the individual needs of patients, including their personal, cultural, social and religious needs. There was a space for people to pray and special dietary requirement were met. Staff said they could raise concerns about disrespectful, discriminatory or abusive behaviour or attitudes towards patients without fear of the consequences. They said that managers were visible on and around the ward and that they made themselves available to staff and patients.

Staff maintained the confidentiality of information about patients.

The ward made adjustments for disabled patients or patients with poor mobility. For example, there was step free access to premises and by meeting patients’ specific communication needs. Access to the building and the ward was all on one level. We saw some examples of easy read leaflets and posters.

Staff made sure patients had information on treatments, local services, patients’ rights and how to complain.

Managers ensured that staff and patients had easy access to interpreters and/or signers where they were needed.

Patients had a choice of food to meet the dietary requirements of religious and ethnic groups and to account for allergies and intolerances.

Staff ensured that patients had access to appropriate spiritual support.

Patients told us that where appropriate, they could access community leave when they were assessed as ready to do so.

Staff knew how each patient preferred to be supported. An advocate visited the hospital several times each week, they told us managers and staff promoted advocacy and were positive about the work being undertaken on the ward.

Staff described how they supported patients to make decisions daily. Where it was difficult to engage patients in therapeutic activities, efforts were made to find areas of interest the patient would respond to. We saw examples of discussions about activities in community meeting minutes.

Staff supported patients to visit shops and facilities in the local town with the aim to increase independence, choice and control.

Staff were aware of and dealt with any specific risk issues, such as risks to self or others and care planned for these accordingly. Responses to risk, such as levels of observation were altered when they needed to be either increased or decreased to meet the most current needs of each patient.

Staff identified and responded to changing risks to, or posed by, patients. They did this immediately following incidents and at multi-disciplinary meetings.

Staff used de-escalation techniques to reduce the need for physical interventions when patients’ become distressed.

Staff told us they felt respected, supported and valued. They told us they felt positive and proud about working for the provider and being part of their team.

Staff had access to support for their own physical and emotional health needs through an occupational health service.

Staff sickness and absence rates were low.

Staff appraisals included conversations about career development and how it could be supported.