Madeira 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

The rating for the key question of Responsive has remained the same Requires Improvement. People did not always receive a person-centred service. Some people's care records had either been written following the on-site assessment when this had been requested or they had been reviewed by the new manager, some documentation contained the incorrect information including the person's name and gender. Staff responded to a decline in people’s health when this had been observed. Some people’s care records contained information about external health care professionals they were working with and any action that had been taken, however, this was not consistent.

This service scored 54 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People told us they enjoyed living at Madeira Lodge and told us they were supported by staff who were kind, caring and knew them well. People told us they were offered choices and their independence was promoted wherever possible.

Every bedroom door had a framed picture of the person, their name and a motif that was personally meaningful to them. For example, one person had a picture of a stream train, another, their local church.

People enjoyed spending time in communal areas in friendship groups and on their own. Activities were provided for people such as board games, jigsaw puzzles, magazines, and books and staff were participating in these activities with the residents.

When one resident was not ready to sit down at a table to eat lunch, staff respected this and said, “I will come back when you are ready.”

Staff told us that they knew people well, using time to help them and get to know people as individuals. We were told, "The staff team were regular, we have had lots of changes, but this has settled now so people can get to know us also."

"Our care planning system is good, but it's really different from using pen and paper. It’s good that it’s all on there (electronic records system) and prompts us to be detailed. If I'm with someone then the care plan is right there."

"I know people well. I know what they like and that is from being with them. I will sit and have a cup of tea. If I can't converse, I would look at the paperwork and (people's) gestures and body language."

However, some people’s care records including their risk assessments were not always up to date or in place. Some care records had either been written following the on-site assessment when this had been requested or they had been reviewed by the new manager, some documentation contained the incorrect information including the person’s name and gender.

The commissioning team had not had any negative feedback from colleagues such as social workers/care managers. A new commissioner visited in early January 2024 mainly to introduce himself. The manager had just started in post that week and she told him of her plans so far. He did not have any concerns from what he saw.

The new manager told us that people’s care records and risk assessments were currently being reviewed and updated where necessary. People’s immediate needs had not always been included within their care plan. Some people’s care records included information about their health needs and the external healthcare professionals involved in their care. However, this was not consistent across all care records that were viewed.

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

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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 relatives were involved in meetings with a member of the management team to enable them to give any feedback, raise any concerns they had or to make suggestions. People’s care and support was not consistently tailored to minimise the risk of them experiencing inequality in experience or outcomes. Some people’s care records contained information about external health care professionals they were working with and any action that had been taken, however, this was not consistent across all records we reviewed. Some care records had either been written following the on-site assessment when this had been requested or they had been reviewed by the new manager, some documentation contained the incorrect information including the person’s name and gender.

Staff told us they were supported when seeking development within the teams. One had recently returned to the service in a higher position of senior carer. They said they are very supported in their role and glad everyone gets on well." Staff were able to describe what person centred care was and gave examples of the individual care they gave to people.

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.