Earlfield 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 identified one breach of legal regulations. Each person had a care plan in place which was reviewed. We found that improvements needed to be made to people’s care plans. More information was needed around people’s likes, dislikes, life history and preferences. This would help the staff to engage further with people around their life experiences and create meaningful conversations. People’s care plans were not written from the person’s perspective. This was a breach of person-centred care. People were supported by staff who were caring and jolly. The approach to care was person centred and the staff tried their best to offer this approach. We observed the staff spoke with people respectfully. The staff supported people to take part in various activities within the home.

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 looked relaxed and comfortable with the staff who supported them. People told us overall they were happy with the care they received. People and relatives that we spoke with acknowledged that the home had gone through many changes and further improvements were needed. People told us they were able to spend time in their room or within communal areas. Their comments included, “The staff are very accommodating” and “I can stay in bed as long as I want to, I just use the bell when I want to get up, today it was 9.30am”. One person was able to tell us that the staff were quite flexible. They could decide whether they wanted meals in their room or downstairs adding, “They always ask if I want to come downstairs”. Although people were happy with the care that they received, adjustments were not made in response to the shortfalls which we identified. This meant that peoples quality of life was affected.

The registered manager told us they and the staff had made improvements to people's care records, to make them person centred. The staff told us they were working with people to create an ‘about me’ document. We read in one person’s document, that the staff had recorded the following comment. “A is good in cooking up stories about anything in a way they please”. This was not written in a person-centred way.

Throughout the inspection we observed how staff supported people. The staff interacted with people in a kind and caring way. During the afternoon we observed various activities all being undertaken at the same time. Snooker was on the TV for some, a ball was being thrown around, one person was sat with a visitor and drums being played in the same lounge. This created a loud and hectic environment for people. We observed one person had their hands over their face at one point. The home had other empty lounge areas, which could have been used. We observed one person said to the staff during the activity that they were hungry. Although they spoke with a member of staff directly, the staff did not carry on the conversation. They were not offered anything to eat. The staff had not considered people’s needs as it was clear the one lounge being used was overwhelming for some people. Some people required 1:1 staff support which was funded by commissioners. Their care plans did not record information in line with expectations from commissioners. One person’s care plan contained no information such as how they presented themselves, what support the member of staff should provide and how the person had responded to the support. There was a lack of important information about people’s individual diverse needs, such as religion and sexuality. More information needed to be added about people’s communication needs.

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 did not look at Equity in experiences and outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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.