Ash Court Care Centre - Camden

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

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question good. At this assessment, the rating has remained good.
This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.
 

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 were treated with kindness. We observed staff interactions with people that displayed kindness, patience and familiarity with people.
Some people we spoke with said they would like staff to be able to provide more time with them after completing their care tasks, “I feel they are very job focussed- they must be, because the social side- having time for a chat, is limited”. However, people also shared that staff were kind and knew their individual interests, “The carers are kind and nice. I chat to them about what they are doing. They know I like football, so they talk to me about that. They are respectful”
Staff we spoke with valued people’s dignity and described caring for people respectfully, for example, by engaging them in conversation about their care preferences and ensuring privacy. Staff also seemed to know the people they were caring for on an individual basis. During our visit, care staff were concerned about 1 person who “did not seem to be their usual self”, they were monitored and advice was sought from the GP promptly.
Partners shared that during their experiences of working with Ash Court they observed positive interactions between people and staff, who knew the people living there well, “Staff teams at Ash Court are experienced and have warm relationships with residents”
 

People were treated as individuals. Care plans reflected people’s individuality, including cultural backgrounds and religion as well as social interests.
Staff we spoke with showed an understanding of the Equality Act 2010 including the protected characteristics named within to guide against discrimination. Ash Court ensured that all staff have undertaken and understood equality training and this was revisited regularly.
Partners advised they have no concerns of people’s individual needs being met, “[Ash court] tailor their approach to each resident (i.e more compassion/humour) as no resident is the same”
Rooms we saw displayed personal items such as pictures, photographs and ornaments. The communal areas were decorated for events throughout the year.
 

The provider supported people’s independence, choice and control. People were offered choices about their care and social activity. Where people were unable to make decisions themselves, choices were made in their best interests with involvement of family or advocates.
On the day of our visit, a group of people visited a local Christmas market for the day. People we spoke with who attended this told us that off-site activities were something that happened regularly and year-round.
The lounge areas were not busy during our visit with many people remaining in their rooms. However, 1 lounge was out of use due to refurbishments taking place and others were crowded with stored items as a result. This work has now been completed. One person told us, “I like going to the lounge, but it is closed at the moment. I like playing cards as well as snakes and ladders.”, This showed us that lounges were used even though we were unable to observe this on the day.
There was an activity coordinator in post who had responsibility for arranging group activities and individual ones for those who either could not participate or preferred to spend their time alone. We observed an afternoon exercise session that was led by the activity staff and people were supported by care staff to ensure safe engagement and encouragement.
There was a weekly timetable of activities which included Spanish classes and a Christmas jumper party.
Social visits were not restricted with a family member saying, “I can visit whenever I like- there are no restrictions”
 

Staff responded to people’s needs, although some people felt this was not always in a timely way. Some people we spoke with indicated that they sometimes felt there was a delay in staff responding to their call bells being pressed. One person told us, “I do sometimes have to wait a long time after using my call bell, but they tend to let me know if they are busy and they do come back.”
Audits of call bell responses did not indicate delays, however, we shared the feedback we received with the registered manager to investigate with people concerned.
On our visit, we observed 1 person who was unable to use their call bell and called out when they needed support instead. It was identified that this may cause delays to staff responding so they were moved closer to a staffing post to ensure they could be heard.

We observed staff were attentive to people’s behaviour and able to identify changes in how a person was presenting promptly. Care plans detailed how people who did not verbalise their needs may make it known if they were in pain or discomfort. Staff knew and recognised these prompts.
 

The provider supported staff wellbeing. We observed safe staff practices supported by adequate staffing levels. Staff rotas ensured a safe level across all shifts and roles. Shift lengths were not a concern, and regular breaks were accounted for in shift planning.
Staff told us they felt well supported and able to raise concerns about staffing levels to senior team leaders if needed.
We spoke with 1 staff member who had encouraged their relative to also seek employment at Ash Court, as they felt so highly of the attention to staff support and wellbeing.