You are here

Archived: Ashton House Nursing Home

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 14 February 2014
Date of Publication: 7 March 2014
Inspection Report published 07 March 2014 PDF

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 14 February 2014, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with carers and / or family members and talked with staff.

Our judgement

People's privacy, dignity and independence were respected. People's views and experiences were taken into account in the way that the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care.

Reasons for our judgement

We were told that people were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. People were able to express their views to staff at any time and we were told that the provider had an 'open door policy'. People and their representative completed an annual satisfaction questionnaire. The responses were collated and analysed by the general manager. We saw the results of the last people questionnaire which was dated May 2013. Comments were all positive and included ' staff are very patient with me', ' happy and relaxed atmosphere' and ' room is pleasant, nice and airy'. The provider also conducted satisfaction questionnaires that were sent out to professionals that had contact with the provider. We saw the most recent report which was dated July 2013. Responses included

'dedicated staff' and ' all patients treated with respect and dignity'. We were informed by the general manager that the satisfaction questionnaire for people who used the service were currently being revised following feedback from relatives.

We spoke to people who told us that ' they were perfectly happy and that nothing could be improved'. We were informed by management that" if something needed sorting out then it was done right away and nothing was too much trouble as it is their home".

We reviewed ten care plans which showed that people's preferences, needs and decisions about their care and treatment had been documented. People or their family members were able to access the care plans and raised any issues regarding this or if there were any changes to the persons care needs. This meant that people and those acting on their behalf were supported appropriately to make decisions about their care and treatment.

We were told that prior to making a decision to take up residence with the provider that people and their relatives were encouraged to visit and tour the home and were given an information brochure. On moving into the home the person was given a copy of the service users' guide which included information on who the staff were, meals, laundry, belongings, statement of purpose and how to make a complaint. We saw that a copy of this was available in the reception area of the home. It was written in a clear and easy to read format and had been updated in June 2013.

We were told that people were given the choice as to the time that they got up and went to bed along with choosing what they would like to eat and when they wanted to eat. Peoples' bedrooms were personalised according to peoples' personal taste. Assistance was given by nursing staff in eating and drinking, showering/bathing as assessed and documented in their care records. People were given the option of whether they wanted to remain in their rooms or go to the lounge area.

We saw that privacy and dignity was maintained by staff knocking on doors prior to entry and by speaking to people in a respectful and friendly way. We were told by people that "the staff are very helpful and that they were very happy".

We saw that daily activities were provided and that there was a dedicated activities team. We spoke to one member of this team who told us that they provided a newsletter every three months and posted the weekly events timetable onto all of the notice boards throughout the home. Activities provided included both group and one to one activities. Hand massages, poetry readings, historical memories and pet therapy were amongst the activities on offer. In addition an outside entertainer visited once a week which varied and included a violinist and a magician. Bus trips were also organised twice a month to places such as the bird of prey sanctuary in the winter and the seaside in the summer. The activity team kept an individual person report of activities attended.

This showed us that people were involved in their care and given choices which were respected by all care and nursing staff.