OSJCT Whitefriars

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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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 and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

People were supported to have access to any equipment they needed to remain safe. This meant people were able to remain independently mobile as long as possible and did not face restrictions.

People were supported to maintain cultural, religious or social activities that they took part in before moving into the home. This meant living at the home did not affect their experiences of practicing their religion or impact on their friendships. For example, several people chose to attend a local day service. Staff had received training in equality and diversity and were able to support people to remove barriers to their care. For example, where people were unable to communicate their likes and dislikes, staff worked with relatives to record their choices. This meant people were able to receive the same quality of care they would have received if they had been able to speak for themselves.

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.