Spring Wood 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

This means we looked for evidence that the service 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.

We saw examples of care plans that had been based on conversations that patients and staff took part in together, these included one to ones between patients and named nurses and in multi-disciplinary meetings. We also saw individualised timetables for patients and evidence that activities detailed on these timetables had been offered and carried out.

We saw evidence that community meetings were taking place and reviewed meeting minutes which showed that patients were given the opportunity to give feedback on their care and the way the ward operated. Meeting minutes we looked at showed activities, staffing, blanket restrictions and the ward environment had been discussed. These meetings resulted in improvements being made to the environment. For example, to the de-escalation room and the outside space.

When appropriate, staff ensured that patients had access to education and work opportunities. For example, basic literacy and numeracy classes were offered on site.

Staff supported patients to maintain contact with their families and carers. There was evidence that those patients that wanted to be, were encouraged and supported to see and speak to their families and carers as much as they wanted to. Where it was appropriate, families and carers were also involved in the care planning process and attended multidisciplinary meetings in person of via videoconference.

Staff made notifications to external bodies as needed. These included to the local authority and the Care Quality Commission. They responded promptly and positively when follow up information was required, and they worked alongside stakeholders to share information.

Information governance systems included confidentiality of patient records.

Staff ensured that patients could obtain information on treatments, local services, patients’ rights and how to complain. The information provided was in a form accessible to the patient group. Staff made information leaflets available in languages spoken by patients.

Staff ensured carers, families and commissioners were regularly updated about the patient’s progress.

The hospital had received 13 formal complaints over the last 12 months. 8 of them had been upheld. Where complaints had been upheld, appropriate actions were taken as a result of the feedback. All formal complaints had received appropriate feedback. There were no themes identified from the analysis of complaints.

Patients knew how to complain or raise concerns. There were posters and forms available and patients were encouraged to make an informal complaint if they didn’t want to put something in writing.

Staff protected patients who raised concerns or complaints from discrimination and harassment.

Staff knew how to handle complaints appropriately.

Staff received feedback on the outcome of investigation of complaints and acted on the findings. For example, staff had been offered reminders and guidance around de-escalation and setting professional boundaries as a result of feedback that had been received from one patient.

Staff ensured the needs of patients with mobility issues were met. For example, wheelchair users could be placed in bedrooms at ground level.

There was enough medical cover day and night, a doctor could attend the ward quickly in an emergency and the hospital was within a reasonable travelling distance to the local acute hospital.

Staff ensured patients had access to post-discharge care. For example, S117 aftercare, community mental health services and crisis services.

Staff planned for patients’ discharge, including communicating with care managers and care co-ordinators. Discharge was never delayed for other than clinical reasons.

Staff within the service and the wider organisation promoted a culture in which the people using the service felt empowered to give their views.

The provider had undertaken equality impact assessments of their policies and procedures to ensure they did not place vulnerable people or people with protected characteristics at a disadvantage.

Staff were trained in equality, diversity, inclusion and human rights.

Staff support patients to make decisions about their care and treatment and their future. For example, about medicines they took and other treatment options.

Staff create personalised care plans to account for the patient’s needs, wishes and feelings.

Staff ensure all relevant healthcare professionals and other relevant bodies are involved in planning the care and treatment of people with complex needs.