Park Lodge

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We saw staff treating young people as individuals and with dignity and respect. People said that staff were kind, caring and supportive. Staff were passionate and committed to delivering excellent care. They co-developed person-centred care passports with the young people that were recovery focused and therapeutic. Young people were actively involved in decision making and felt enabled to make their own choices about their care. Family members and people who knew young people well were encouraged to be involved with the care and treatment of their relatives and were extremely complementary about hospital. Staff were visible and available to young people supporting them to maintain their independence, choice and control. Staff gave examples of when they had gone above and beyond to help and support with the young people's recovery. Young people were able to voice their concerns about their care and how the service was managed and told us that they felt listened to and included. There was a range of appropriate equipment and facilities to support young people and aid recovery. Information was communicated in a way that met their individual needs and preferences.

This service scored 90 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Young people said staff were kind, compassionate and treated them with respect. Parents told us that Park Lodge had been the best inpatient service they had experienced because they felt that staff genuinely cared about the young people and parents. When discussing the care and treatment offered by Park Lodge, one parent told us that 'they have saved their [child’s] life.' One patient told us there had been one occasion when an agency staff member had been rude but stressed they had felt able to speak with other staff about this and it had been dealt with immediately by the manager.

All staff we spoke with were passionate and committed to delivering excellent care. Staff told us that they didn’t just see the illness but saw the young person at the other end of their journey. They could see potential in their young people and when asked what they were most proud of all staff gave specific examples of patient achievements and accomplishments. Staff provided 1-1s with young people and built positive therapeutic relationships. Staff supported young people to ensure they were able to communicate their care needs and helped them develop communication passports, so staff knew their needs, likes and dislikes. Staff told us they always considered young people’s preferences, and gave examples of when young people were in crisis, staffing allocations and rotas had been changed at short notice to ensure they were supported by staff who they felt most comfortable with. Staff were accommodating to changing their rotas to ensure that young people were most suitably supported. Staff gave examples of where their colleagues had supported young people outside of their normal working hours. For example, on their weekend off duty, a staff member had offered telephone support to the family of a young person who had recently been discharged giving them advice around meal preparation and support.

We received positive feedback from partners who described the service as offering bespoke packages of care for young people.

Dignity was promoted throughout the service, and we saw this practiced by leaders and the whole staff team. Leaders were a role model for person centred care and made efforts to ensure that all staff within the service understood the importance of demonstrating this within all roles. We observed staff treating young people with kindness and compassion. When interacting with young people we saw staff offering support in a manner that reflected the young person’s understanding and age. We observed staff offering praise and giving reassurance to young people when they needed it. We observed staff talking about young people positively and celebrating their achievements. On the day of our assessment, staff and young people had organised a summer fete. Young people had spent a lot of time baking and making craft items to sell for this event. Staff spoke proudly about young people and praised them for the work that they had put into this. While on site, we also overheard a conversation with a group of staff who cheered and celebrated when hearing about a previous patient’s academic success.

Young people told us that they were actively involved in their care and recovery plans. People told us that they set goals and activities that had meaning to them. One young person told us that when they were first admitted staff made them feel safe and comfortable by completing activities that were therapeutic and meaningful. They had kept mementos of these activities and displayed them in their room as they meant so much to them. We reviewed feedback from a parent survey where a parent had commented that the service was very experienced in understanding the needs of their specific culture.

Staff gave examples of how they delivered person centred care. They followed young people’s care passports so were aware of their preferences and wishes and people received a range of activities which met their individual needs, dependent on their preferences and abilities. Staff told us about therapeutic projects and tools they had developed with young people to ensure they had meaning and could be used throughout their recovery journey. Staff said they got to know young people’s interests and incorporated these within care plans so the young people would be more engaged and focused. All members of the multi-disciplinary team worked in collaboration to ensure care plans were implemented in a way that was individual to the young person. Staff gave an example of a young person who wished to go a concert, and they supported them in developing tools relevant to this activity to help build skills and confidence. The outcome was this young person achieved their goal. Leaders told us that they had changed the environment significantly since opening the service. They told us they had reduced the number of beds available to allow space for a sensory room to ensure that the environment was therapeutic and conducive to effective recovery.

We observed staff treating young people as individuals and delivering care according to their specific plans. We saw staff adapting communication and supporting young people’s individual needs. We observed feedback shared from a family of a young person who had been discharged two days prior to the assessment. The family had thanked the chef for offering support with meal preparation during their annual leave.

Care plans were person-centred and showed young people were involved in their development and reviews. All young people had a patient passport which was very detailed, accessible and person centred to reflect young people’s preferences. Behaviour support plans recognised strengths and challenges identified by the young person, their carers and the wider team. Meal support plans were developed in collaboration with the young person. They were recovery focused and identified triggers and strategies. Some young people had requested to keep small pets in their rooms and staff supported them to put together a proposal on how they would care for their pets. Together they set goals for having a pet and this was incorporated into the care plan. Pet care plans and proposals were creative and included pictures completed by young people on how they would care for their animal. People told us that caring for pets allowed them to feel more at home and this had also helped their recovery progress.

Young people said they felt involved in their care and felt comfortable in sharing concerns. People understood their rights and families told us staff had supported young people in appealing decisions made about their detention. They enjoyed different activities both on site and within the community. Young people said they were able to maintain relationships with family and were supported to access leave. We were given examples of how families who lived far away had been supported to have contact outside of the hospital. One parent said that although visiting was flexible it would be helpful if the family room had a visible availability timetable so visits could be scheduled in a timelier manner.

Staff supported young people to receive a range of activities which met their individual needs, dependent on their preferences and abilities. Staff told us about creative ways in which they engaged young people to develop their independence. For example, the hospital had a pet bearded dragon which many of the young people took responsibility for looking after. This helped build confidence and independence for young people, starting with small steps which led to achieving goals. Staff supported young people with access to section 17 when warranted and attended activities in the community.

There was a range of appropriate equipment to support and maximise people’s independence and outcomes from care and treatment. Information was available on ward notice boards informing young people of their rights, feedback on care, the complaints process, an activity timetable, meal choice, advocacy and general well-being information.

Care plans demonstrated that young people were actively involved in decision making and were supported to make their own choices about their care. We reviewed plans that were focused on empowerment and demonstrated where young people had choice and control within their recovery. For example, we saw a home leave plan that a young person had developed with staff which clearly identified positive steps they needed to take to reach their goal. This incorporated periods of home leave that increased on a weekly basis and detailed specific activities that the young person wished to do during the home leave. Some of these included eating experiences at restaurants of the young person’s choice, physical activity and educational goals that could be achieved at home. This plan was developed with the family and had a positive outcome for the young person as they achieved a successful transition home. Young people were supported to maintain networks that were important to them and had access to family and friends while using the service. Young people also had access to activities and the local community to promote and support their independence, health and wellbeing.

Young people said staff were available when they needed them for support and were helpful. One young person said staff helped them feel safe on the ward. We heard of examples of staff going above and beyond in their care and treatment and had responded immediately to offer support when needed. One parent told us they had witnessed staff having to use physical interventions to support their child. They said all staff were kind and caring throughout and ensured the young person was kept safe.

Staff ensured they knew young people well and how important it was to understand what may upset them. Staff always responded to young people when they were distressed and listened to what they needed at that time. They said if young people felt more comfortable with certain staff, they would try to make sure that they could facilitate someone they felt safe with to respond.

We observed staff giving reassurance to young people when they needed it. Staff were caring and supportive to young people.

Care plans and patient records demonstrated that staff were alert to people's needs and responded promptly and appropriately to these. The team regularly discussed needs and engaged young people and their families in how best to respond. Appropriate actions were in place when young people required urgent support, particularly around health needs.

All staff we interviewed spoke positively about the service, leaders and managers. Staff said Park Lodge was a great place to work and they felt valued and respected. They described a positive culture that cared and supported both young people and staff. Staff told us they did not feel that there was a hierarchy and that leaders were always available to offer support. Staff worked well together and they were proud of the way the whole team had developed the service. There were enough staff on shifts to offer support and they had regular breaks in a dedicated rest area or off site. Staff were positive about the monthly training development days which gave them dedicated time to reset, reflect and recharge. Leaders emphasised the importance of self-care which was a regular theme at these days. Staff had lots of opportunities to give feedback on the service and leaders valued and listened to any issues or concerns they had. Staff gave examples of where they had given feedback, and changes had quickly been implemented. One staff member told us that they had responded to the "how is your day?" to say they had felt stressed due to a difficult day, and managers and leaders checked in with them the same day. Staff gave specific examples of how they had been supported by managers to have a good work-life balance.

Staff attended monthly team development days to receive updated knowledge, reflective practice and supervision. Staff had regular debriefs following any incidents and received support from the psychologist. Managers supported staff through regular managerial supervisions and annual appraisals. Staff had access to a freedom to speak up guardian, who they could speak to confidentially. They could give feedback at staff meetings and via the "How is your day?" QR code. The psychologist had developed a staff wellbeing leaflet with resources for staff to use. An Employee Assistance Programme was in place which offered access to 24-hour counselling and advice. Staff had access to a wellbeing app which focused on emotional wellbeing and physical health and could log steps, activity, water intake.