Whitestone 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 inspection we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

The service was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to the management of complaints. Improvements were found at this assessment and the service was no longer in breach of this regulation.

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 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. For example, care plans included information about people’s needs, likes dislikes and preferences. Our observations showed staff knew people well and had formed positive relationships with them.

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. For example, people’s care records evidenced they received consistent care across different settings and from different healthcare professionals.This included with their GP and community nursing teams. A record for each person was maintained detailing visits and communication with other professionals.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information. For example, some information included in the providers statement of purpose did not accurately describe the service provision, including the service type and current registered manager details. However, the providers complaints procedure was displayed at the home informing people and others about how to make a complaint if they were unhappy with any aspect of the service.

The provider did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas about their care, treatment and support. Staff did not always involve people in decisions about their care or tell them what had changed as a result. For example, there was a lack of evidence to show people and others acting on their behalf were given the opportunity to provide feedback about the service provision. The provider told us they were in the process of gathering people’s views using questionnaires. There was no evidence to show people or those acting on their behalf were involved in any discussions about potential changes following events such as accidents and incidents.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. For example, prompt referrals were made for people to agencies such as dieticians and community nursing teams.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. For example, people’s care records detailed times and dates of appointments and outcomes including any future appointments to make sure they were followed up.

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. For example, people and/or their representatives were given the opportunity to discuss and record future plans including people’s end of life wishes.