Cherry 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 Good. At this assessment the rating has changed to Requires Improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.

The provider was in breach of the legal regulation relating to person-centred care.

This service scored 61 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People were not always involved in the planning of their care. Most people and relatives we spoke with told us they had not been involved in the person’s care plan or review of this. Care plans did not always contain detailed information about people’s individual needs, for example, where people were living with dementia. Care plans were not written to reflect people’s strengths, goals abilities and interests to enable staff to meet all of their needs and preferences. Resident meetings had taken place in October 2024, with 7 people in attendance. There was no evidence to show that people who did not attend were asked their views. One person said, “There’s been one residents meeting since I’ve been here. It was a while back. It really was a ‘residents’ meeting as there was no management there just one of the activities staff. There was an agenda which we added to, and we were told what was discussed would be fed back to the management.” The manager had started to review care plans with people and relatives, where appropriate, to ensure they were person-centred, and that people’s views were regularly sought.

People were supported to access health and social care services. Health care professionals told us that they were involved, when required in people’s care. The electronic care system enabled time responsive recording; this supported staff to document all interventions made to support person-centred care. Staff recorded visits, advice and any treatment from health and social care on the electronic system. Staff received appropriate support to enable them to understand the needs of the residents, such as an induction period.

People had their communication needs assessed and reviewed. Care plans detailed the individual communication needs of each person. Staff were aware of the importance of providing people with information in a format they could fully understand. This included large print, audio, and picture format if required.

The manager told us that the complaints procedure was being sent to relatives to ensure the formal process of complaints was understood. Surveys for people and their relatives had only recently been reinstated, and the manager was beginning to review the feedback. Some improvement was required to ensure informal feedback was logged when necessary to ensure actions had been taken. Resident meetings as referred to under ’person-centred care’, needed to include all people’s views. The service had not received any complaints, but people and relatives told us they would raise concerns or issues informally and could do so in a range of accessible ways. One person said, “I talk to the carers and we sort things out. There’s not been anything much.” Another said, “I’d speak with [head senior] and they would sort it out, I’m sure.” A relative told us, “I would probably talk to 1 of the owners. I reported [concern] I had seen and it was thoroughly looked into. I had an excellent response.” Another told us, “I haven’t needed to complain but if I was concerned, I would speak with one of the owners or [Head Senior]. I’m sure things would get resolved quickly.”

People and relatives told us that staff supported people to access health care services. Staff understood that people had a right to receive the care and support that met their specific individual needs and could describe how they did this. Advice from health care professionals was documented in people’s electronic care records. Staff were aware of people’s needs and how these were met.

Processes were in place to help ensure people’s care, treatment and support promoted equality, removed barriers and protected their rights. Electronic care planning meant people’s care plans and profiles could be shared across a multidisciplinary team if appropriate. This helped people access the most appropriate care and support for them. People had equal opportunities to access care and support.

People’s decisions and what matters to them were not always reflected fully in their care plans. The manager was working through these with people and their relatives where necessary, to ensure their views were known and that information was personalised. Most people’s care plans included a section on their preferences for end of life care. The manager told us that training for staff in end of life care had been sourced and was now accessible for staff.