The Hermitage

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 scores for this area with scores based on the rating from the previous inspection, which was good. Staff knew people’s needs well and people experienced good outcomes in relation to their health. Managers understood the importance of getting to know people well, and supported people to live a fulfilling life. However, processes did not adequately reflect people’s views of the knowledge staff had of people’s individual needs.

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.

People felt staff knew them well and what their individual needs were. One person said, “I know all the girls really well and they know me which is lovely. We all have a good relationship and get on well. They know how I like to spend my days here. I feel quite relaxed being here.” A second person told us, “I have been here long enough now for them all to know me and what I like to do. They respect that I like to stay in my room and don’t try to force me out.”

The management team told us how they spoke with people and their relatives to understand their individual needs, wishes and preferences so they could personalise their care. Staff told us they completed a handover meeting when the staff team changed throughout the day, this included a handover to night staff. They discussed people’s needs and whether there were any concerns which required a call to the GP, for example.

Our observations showed staff knew people well and had an understanding of their individual needs. People were supported by a member of staff with their lunch where they needed this, and people were able to have their lunch where they chose. However, 1 person told us they did not like something they were served for lunch. Staff interacted with people in a positive way and they showed an understanding and knowledge of people’s families and backgrounds.

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.

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.

We received some positive feedback from people about how their lives had improved since they started using the service. One person said, “If I was still at home I wouldn’t be here now. I had sepsis and was very ill. The carers have looked after me so well and I can get about on my own and do what I want. The care is excellent.” A second person explained, “When I was living at home I was dying, I couldn’t walk and now I can walk with a frame. It is down to the staff helping me and encouraging me. I was also incontinent and now I am fine. If I hadn’t come here I would have been dead by now.”

One of the management team told us how they were committed to ensuring people maintained good health and their independence. They spoke passionately about the improvement 1 person made since moving to the service. They explained how they liaised closely with the person’s social worker to ensure they received the care they needed to improve their health and wellbeing, this included ensuring that person could access the right services to achieve this.

The processes did not reflect the knowledge staff had of people’s individual needs and how people were supported to overcome barriers to their health and wellbeing needs. Care plans did not adequately reflect people’s views and the limited information on pre-admission assessments meant potential barriers were not identified and planned for prior to admission.

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.