Washington 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 68 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. Staff felt a more stable staff team would help with providing personalised care. A staff member said, “There is lots of agency at the moment. Regular staff have more cohesion, especially when dealing with dementia, end of life and challenging behaviour.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible or supportive of choice and continuity. The provider was using a high number of agency staff. Staff told us this impacted on people. A staff member said, “We get a lot of agency in, this impacts a lot as they don't know the residents. Sometimes we have regular ones, sometimes have new faces.” The registered manager told us they aimed to use consistent agency staff, who were familiar with people’s needs.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Information could be provided in different formats if required.

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. There were regular opportunities for people and relatives to provide feedback, such as attending meetings and completing questionnaires.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff were always available to support people if needed. A relative said, “There are always staff on the floor when I come in.” There was an on-call system to provide out of hours support and advice.

Staff and leaders did not always actively listen to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. This meant people’s care was not always tailored in response to this. Due to the high use of agency staff, people did not always experience positive outcomes. Staff did not always know people’s care needs leading to variations in outcomes for people.

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’s preferences were discussed and detailed in care plans.