Larwood

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

Staff knew people well as individuals and knew what their preferences, likes and dislikes were. People were supported to follow their interests and staff supported them to see health professionals if this support was needed. Care plans gave a good overview of people's support needs and people and relatives were asked to feedback about the service on a regular basis.

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.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people's autonomy, choice and control. For example, we observed interactions between staff and a person who used the service where People's care was reviewed regularly, and people had the opportunity to shape the service they received. The registered manager told us they regularly amended or updated the care plans with families as and when required.

The service worked in a person-centred way to meet the needs of people with a learning disability and autistic people. Care plans included details of people's preferences and things that made them happy or sad. Our discussions with staff demonstrated they were knowledgeable about these details. The provider was aware of best practice and the principles of Right support, right care, right culture and were ensuring that these principles were carried out. Staff received training to work with people who may have communication difficulties and use tools such as, objects of reference or pictorial guides and easy read formats. Staff and resident meetings took place monthly. Resident meetings were proactive and focussed on outcomes for people using the service. For example, a service user wanted to go to the cinema and this was arranged accordingly.

Feedback from relatives was positive. They told us their family members were treated with respect. People were supported by a small team who knew them well and how they like to be supported.

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.