St Helens Hall and 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

We assessed 2 quality statements from this key question. We have combined the score for this area with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. Our rating for this key question remains good. People were treated fairly and did not experience discrimination. People felt listened to and were encouraged to raise concerns and suggestions individually and via relative meetings and resident discussion groups.

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.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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

Evidence of relative meetings showed the responsiveness of the manager and encouragement for people to voice their opinions and needs. For example, one person asked if omelettes could be an option on the menu and the service manager agreed. One person told us there is a resident ‘discussion group’ every Friday morning that she attends which involves cakes, drinks, music, and a general chat. One family member told us that her mum is safe and has kept her independence, although staff are always on hand if needed. Her mum recently fell out of bed and staff rang her straightaway. She feels that she can raise any concerns with the staff.

All staff told us they would support people to make a complaint.

People and their relatives were involved in providing feedback through meetings. There was evidence people were encouraged to provide feedback and suggestions. Where recommendations were made there was evidence these were explored. For relatives that could not attend any meetings technology was utilised, and video calls were completed. Supervision took place and there was evidence within staff meetings, staff were offered the opportunities to progress their careers and complete a diploma. It was evidenced via you said/we did that the manager acted upon and encouraged staff feedback and suggestions.

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.

People and their families told us they were treated fairly by the home. 26% or respondents selected ‘agree’ and 74% ‘strongly agree’ in an internal survey to the question ‘The home treats me fairly. If I reported discrimination the home would respond appropriately’ A family member told us they feel able to raise any concerns with the staff, she has never reviewed nor seen her mum’s care plan but has never felt the need to. She feels that her mum is safe when staff support her and if there were any issues, her mum would raise it with her. Staff keep her informed of any changes to her mum’s needs and they will keep an eye on her mum if she is not well.

Staff informed us people were treated equally and were not aware of any discrimination. Problems were reported to management and acted upon. The registered manager told us that she ensures people can voice their opinions for example, using the feedback box, residents and relative’s meetings and surveys. An example was given about a relative that completed a survey asking for her mother to have a new toilet seat and highlighted rotting wood on the door frame. Both issues were rectified. The registered manager told us that she is not aware of any people facing discrimination within the service or community.

Long term care plan goals were not always meaningful or SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound), and short-term goals were left blank. An equality and human rights policy emphasised person centred care and commitment to equal opportunities for all. An Accessible Information Standard Policy was in place outlining the steps to recognising and manage a person’s communication needs. The use of this was evidenced in care plans for example, care plan of person H documented person as partially deaf and preferred method of communication noted. Care plans documented a person’s gender, sexuality, and cultural identity.

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