Ashurst

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.

We did not look at Kindness, compassion and dignity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Staff took the time to understand individual communication styles and develop a rapport with them. People were encouraged to make informed choices for themselves; staff respected these choices and wherever possible, accommodated their wishes. For example, in January 2025, staff had completed a presentation on understanding cosmetic surgery with the intent to educate and empower people to make informed, thoughtful decisions on whether this was appropriate for them.

Staff had the skills to recognise signs when people experienced emotional distress and knew how to support them to minimise the need to restrict their freedom to keep them safe. A person told us, “I feel comfortable and safe.” A relative commented, “I’ve not had any issues with staffing; [person] speaks to [registered manager name] and opens up to him. [Person] is really lucky to get a placement like this.”

People had access to friends and relatives and the option of visiting them. Where people did not want to share any information with relatives, staff respected this choice. Staff worked with people regarding their relationships and carried out pro-active safeguarding educational work with them in a curious but not forceful way. Where applicable, debrief sessions were held with people and staff; staff were trained to do debrief sessions, which had been made less bureaucratic and kept logs of these meetings. A staff member told us, “We have staff de-briefs and can always speak to seniors and managers; both the deputy manager and registered manager have a wealth of experience.” The registered manager told us the focus was on the culture and expectations of people and staff worked alongside people regarding this.

The provider supported people to self-advocate and also allowed them to use independent advocates if representation was required.

Staff were very positive about the support they received; they told us they felt valued and were treated with respect. A staff member told us, “We can raise concerns and they [managers] welcome it; it is a strong staff team and [managers] always check in with us regularly.”

Risks were well managed, and people were supported to co-develop detailed risk management plans and were supported with the development of positive peer relationships. We saw staff offered prompts and positive encouragement to people and encouraged them to do as much as they could for themselves, encouraging their independence. Policies and procedures were in place to support people’s independence, choice and control.

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.