Goodson Lodge Care Centre

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 79 (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.

People and their representatives had been involved in care planning. Care records reflected people’s unique and individual needs. There was a ‘resident of the day’ process which supported staff to focus on certain people each day. The process enabled all departments to be involved in people’s care. Kitchen staff checked with people if they were satisfied with the food, maintenance staff checked people’s rooms and care staff completed care reviews. People had their own care plans which were reviewed regularly. The service used an electronic care planning system which enabled staff to access the most up to date guidance on handheld devices they carried whilst at work.

We observed staff supporting people to spend time how they wished. Whilst the service was divided into 4 different units, people could move around and join in with events across the home. Staff knew people well and were observed providing people with care that met their recorded needs. Staff had a daily handover to get any updates on changes to people’s needs.

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 worked with other services, to ensure people received continuity of care. Examples included community nurses, GPs, social workers and a local team who provided specialist dementia advice and support. Details of this support was recorded in people’s care records.

The service offered respite stays to people in the local community. This was a short term stay for people to use the service to give their family carer a break or to have a rest themselves. The registered manager told us people often returned for frequent respite stays which indicated that people were happy with their care.

Staff rotas were designed around continuity of care for people which meant people were supported by a consistent team of staff. Whilst the service could use agency staff to fill gaps on rotas, it had not been needed as permanent or bank staff covered shifts.

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

People’s communication needs were recorded in their care plans. There was detailed guidance on how best to communicate with people and what their preferences were. For example, some people needed a hearing aid, however, some people chose not to wear them. This preference was recorded so staff were aware of people’s needs.

Information could be provided in a range of formats. In the provider information return (PIR) the provider told us ‘Our website has been created with the aim of being accessible to as many people as possible. Our contracts are clear and transparent, and they are available in different formats such as large print, braille and easy read. We ensure that these are discussed in a way to ensure residents rights are understood prior to being signed’.

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 was a complaints policy, and we found complaints were recorded and investigated. Information about how to complain was on the provider’s website and shared with people when they moved into the service.

There were regular satisfaction surveys shared with people for different areas such as food and overall care which enabled people to share their views. Surveys completed prior to this inspection showed people were very satisfied with the service.

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

We observed people had access to equipment to in line with their assessed needs. A lift was available to support people to access different floors of the building. The service had wide corridors, which allowed people to move freely using mobility aids. Outside areas were well maintained and designed to allow people to move independently between different areas.

Prior to our inspection the premises had been refurbished. There had been a programme of painting, decorating and replacing some carpets. People had been involved in choosing colour schemes for the communal spaces.

The service was staffed day and night with each shift having a senior staff member in charge. There was also an on-call system which enabled staff to reach out for management support if they were unsure about any area of care delivery. This meant people were not facing any barriers to care.

Staff and leaders were innovative in how they listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. Staff and leaders actively used this information to provide exceptionally tailored care, support and treatment in response to this.

Leaders had an understanding and knowledge of people who may face discrimination or inequality. Staff were provided with specialised training to ensure they understood people’s needs and were able to confidently provide care and support. For example, staff received specialist dementia training and had access to the support from a specialist dementia nurse employed by the provider. The new head of dementia care was planning to provide training to the staff on sexuality in dementia care. The aim was to support staff to achieve a better understanding of people’s needs.

The service had used technology to improve outcomes for people. For example, 1 person was struggling to accept personal care, staff had used technology to play a recorded message. This helped reduce the person’s anxiety and distress and enabled staff to provide them with personal care. For another person with a visual impairment, staff had liaised with external organisations to source equipment that supported them to eat independently.

If people were unable to access local services, staff organised for people to see professionals at the service. For example, professionals came in to do eye tests, hearing tests and foot care. The registered manager said they had identified that dental care could be problematic as there was a shortage in the local area. However, they had reached out to the local GP to help source a dental service for people who needed it.

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.

There was no end-of-life care being completed during our inspection; however, the service had provided this type of care. People were encouraged to record their wishes and preferences for end-of-life care. We found for some people this information was detailed in their care plan, however, for some people there was less detail recorded. The registered manager told us this was an area of care the service was working to improve. Links had been established with local funeral providers who had held events in the service for people and families to learn about and discuss funeral arrangements. The service was also working towards achieving a recognised accreditation aimed at supporting people effectively in the last years of their lives. The registered manager told us, "This demonstrates our commitment to delivering high-quality, person-centred end-of-life care in line with recognised national standards".