Sutton 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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.

We observed people had received person centred care. Care records had been updated and reflected each person’s likes, preferences, routines and choices. A relative told us, “The activity person is really good and they’re always around, they make sure there are things for people to do.” A staff told member told us, “Care plans tell you a lot about the individuals and the individuals can also tell you things about themselves.”

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.

Care records showed health professionals were involved in people’s health care needs and their advice and guidance was recorded in people records. Relatives told us health professional had been involved. One relative said. “I’ve seen the dementia outreach nurse in the care home.”

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

No one who used the service at the time of our assessment required information to be in different formats. The provider implemented new processes and systems to improve how information was shared with people and their relatives. Letters were sent to relatives to keep them informed of any changes, invite them to activities, and share positive news from the home. Information, such as resident champions, was displayed in communal areas, along with posters which showed what date themed days and activities were.

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.

People were supported to provide feedback through resident meetings and quality questionnaires. Relatives and staff were also asked to provide feedback. Feedback was reviewed, and ‘You Said, We Did’ records were shared to demonstrate the actions taken in response. One relative told us, “I get a questionnaire, and they send letters about activities and any changes.” This meant the provider had systems to obtain, review, and act on feedback from people, relatives, and staff.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in experiences and outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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.

The provider had end-of-life care plans in place, which were reviewed with people and those important to them. This ensured people had the opportunity to discuss their wishes and preferences. Required records relating to resuscitation decisions were also in place. This meant people's end-of-life wishes had been recorded and respected.