Grangewood Lodge Residential 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.

Staff knew people well and used communication effectively to involve people and support people to make choices. One relative told us, “We are kept informed appropriately, staff are amazing at keeping in touch.”

People, relatives and staff told us they liked the family atmosphere of the care home. The care home had a relaxed feel where people seemed comfortable. One relative told us, “The staff make it feel like home, we feel they care about the whole family”.

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 registered manager had a very good understanding of the service the care home could safely provide and worked with people, their relatives and professionals to ensure people’s needs could be met and they would be happy living in the care home.

Visiting professionals reported positive working relationships with all staff. Staff were able to identify, record and report changes in people’s needs and request specialist assessment and advice where required.

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

The provider was able to provide information in a range of formats to suit people’s individual needs. For example, where people were assessed as requiring tools to support good communication these were provided and used accordingly.

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’s relatives told us they had regular contact with the support provider and would discuss any issues they had and share feedback with the managers and staff. Relatives told us they were happy with how the provider managed their feedback and they had no improvements to suggest.

The provider acknowledged surveys were not sent out to all families as they had regular interactions and discussed feedback face to face. The provider identified an opportunity to review their process to gain feedback from stakeholders to ensure consistency and to formally evidence the actions they had taken in response to the feedback they received.

The provider managed complaints effectively, recording the concerns and the outcomes and sharing these with the people involved.

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

People received care which met their needs. Staff knew people’s needs well and were able to facilitate access to care, support and treatment as people required. The provider was able to arrange flexible support accompany people to appointments.

Staff had received training in equality, diversity and human rights and understood their responsibilities to ensure people received an equitable service.

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.

People’s protected characteristics were considered in care planning. For example, where people’s support needs varied due to their health condition, guidance for staff was available to support people to achieve consistently good outcomes.

Relevant policies were in place to promote equality, diversity and human rights.

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 involved in making decisions about how their care was to be provided and care plans included any specific person-centred details for future care. Care records included details of people’s choices regarding future events. For example, details of people’s preferences and wishes for when at the end of their lives.