Bentley Lodge Care Home

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.

People’s care plans reflected their full range of care, treatment and support needs, including those related to their protected characteristics under the Equality Act. A staff member said, “Care plans should reflect a person holistically. What good care means for them does not mean that is good for another. Care is all about the individual and their needs.”

People and their representatives were involved in planning and making decisions about their care and treatment. People’s care plans documented their involvement and reflected their needs and preferences about how they wanted their care to be provided. A person’s care plan noted their particular preferences and how they reacted if they were not satisfied, to inform and guide staff.

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.

People received continuity of care in relation to the staff rostered to support them. There was not a need for agency staff, there were sufficient staff employed to cover any staff absences due to sickness or annual leave. People and relatives said, “They have the same faces all the time, they seem to be able to keep their staff” and “Pretty well the same staff. They all seem to have been here quite a while.”

Professionals who provided feedback told us people received the level of care contracted and that if people’s needs increased, they took relevant action for people.

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

People were provided with a range of information about the service in the service user guide and statement of purpose, including their rights. The provider was also in the process at the time of the site visits of updating and re-launching the home’s website, which has been completed.

People’s information and communication needs were identified, recorded, flagged, shared and met as required by the Accessible Information Standard. Staff told us how they used pictures, signs or drawings with people to communicate 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.

The provider had a complaints policy if people wished to raise any issues. People knew how to raise any issues and felt able to. A relative told us, they had not made a complaint but had mentioned an issue which was addressed immediately. We saw any complaints received had been logged, investigated, addressed and a response provided.

The provider also sought feedback on the service through surveys which were sent to people, relatives, friends and advocates and residents’ meetings. People were then provided with feedback on any issues raised and actions taken through, ‘You said we did’ which identified the issue and the action taken.

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

The provider had ensured reasonable adjustments had been made to accommodate people’s physical health needs. Bathrooms were accessible and people had access to any equipment they required to ensure their care could be provided safely, for example hoists and air mattresses. The service and gardens were accessible for people. Staff ensured people’s care plans identified their sensory care needs and how these were to be met, for example by ensuring people wore their hearing aids and their glasses kept clean.

The new clinical lead told us changes had been made to make the environment more dementia friendly for people, the colour of some corridors had been changed, a music feature had been created on 1 corridor wall and pictures were on bedroom doors where required to assist people in finding their bedroom.

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.

Staff completed training in equality and diversity and had access to the providers guidance. Staff said, “I apply this in my everyday work by making sure I give everyone respect, in their religion, their beliefs and everybody needs to be respected for who they are and what they believe in.” People confirmed they felt treated fairly by staff. Their feedback included, “Very well. No issues, quite the opposite, they are very kind” and “Oh yes, treated well.”

The clinical lead told us they recognised there was a need to make activities more person centred for those living with dementia. This work was underway, we observed people enjoying picture bingo. Activities staff had taken people out using a taxi service where the drivers were trained in working with people with a diagnosis of dementia.

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 were asked about their wishes for their future care and what was important to them when they were ready to have these conversations. People’s relatives were supported with kindness and compassion.

People had Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) forms, which summarised their preferences in the event of an emergency if they could not make decisions or express their wishes. People approaching the end of their life were identified and this information was shared with staff and relevant services to ensure people’s’ end of life care was well planned.

Staff had completed relevant training in end of life care and further training was booked. Staff felt confident in the quality of end-of-life care they provided and a health care professional confirmed people were supported well. Staff ensured people had medicines in place to ensure their comfort if required.