Ashfield Nursing Home

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.

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.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices, and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

We reviewed care plans which were detailed, person-centred and tailored to people’s individual needs and wishes.

Care plans reflected people’s preferences and daily routines. For example, staff supported people in a flexible way that respected their choices around mealtimes and bedtime routines, which ensured care was delivered at times that suited the person rather than being task-led.

We saw positive examples of person-centred language being used within records, which reflected people’s preferences, strengths and individuality. This supported a respectful and consistent approach to care. However, most relatives we spoke with told us, they had not seen the care plans. Despite this one said, “I know if I have something to say, I am listened to and they will action it. It is nice to feel valued and respected. It makes for a very good relationship, especially knowing that all they want is what is best for my loved one”.

The management team was in the process of updating all care plans with residents in order to share with family where required. Action had been taken to address care plan involvement by ensuring residents, relatives, representatives, and advocates were identified and involved in reviews where appropriate. Consent, invitations, contributions, and outcomes were recorded within care records, with capacity and best-interest processes followed when required. Monthly audits were to be completed to ensure involvement was evidenced and documented. We saw evidence of care plans where this was already in progress.

This ensured people remained at the centre of their care and were supported in a way that was responsive to their individual lifestyles and preferences.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The registered manager and staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s diverse health and care needs. Our observations confirmed that staff consistently applied this knowledge in practice, ensuring people’s needs were met effectively.

People were supported to make informed choices about their care, which included decisions about attending appointments. Staff provided information in a way people could understand and respected their preferences, enabling them to be involved in decisions about their health and wellbeing.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Staff adapted their communication to ensure people received information in ways they could understand. For example, staff used visual aids, such as pictorial menus and sample plates of food, to support people to make informed choices.

We also observed staff who used a range of communication methods, which included gestures, signs and an understanding of people’s body language, to engage effectively. Staff were aware of each person’s preferred communication style and adapted their approach accordingly.

This enabled people and staff to communicate effectively, reducing potential frustration and helping to prevent distress and behaviours associated with unmet communication needs.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

We observed open and transparent communication between people, staff and management. Relatives told us they knew how to raise any concerns and who to speak to if needed. However, they all identified that re-establishing the residents’ meetings would be useful. The registered manager was in the process of organising this.

Residents we spoke with could not recall any need to raise a complaint as any issues were dealt with by care staff. One resident said, “I can’t recall any proper complaint to raise. I’d ask to talk to the manager.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

We saw evidence which confirmed people had been supported to access care and treatment, including emergency care, when they needed it. People we spoke with told us of access to GP’s, nurses, a chiropodist, opticians, a hairdresser and specialist appointments.

This meant people were effectively supported to access the care and treatment required in a timely way to support them to maintain their health and wellbeing.

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 experienced equitable, person-centred care that reflected their individual needs, preferences and values. Staff recognised and responded to differences in communication, health needs and personal circumstances to ensure people achieved positive outcomes. People were provided with accessible policies and procedures in formats they could understand, which supported them to raise concerns or discuss areas such as complaints and freedom to speak up.

Care plans were tailored to support people at all stages of their lives. For example, one person was being supported to maintain a healthier lifestyle, whilst still being supported to continue past times they enjoyed. Staff had agreed a solution working with the person and the hospital consultant that ensured specific safety guidelines around cigarette smoking.

Staff treated people with dignity and respect, ensuring their choices and voice remained central to their care. This approach supported fair and consistent care delivery and promoted positive experiences for people.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

People were supported to consider and discuss their wishes for end-of-life care in a sensitive and person-centred way, which ensured their preferences were understood and respected. People were supported to plan in a way that reflected their wishes, goals and interests. Care plans included information about what was important to people, helping staff to provide meaningful opportunities and experiences.

For example, people were supported to enjoy planned activities such as shopping, which reflected their preferences and promoted independence and social inclusion. However, we were also told that recently activities had not taken place as often, due to a change in activity coordinator. Residents we spoke with could recall family parties and musical events. The provider had employed a new coordinator who was getting to know the residents likes and dislikes in order to provide tailored activities.

This approach helped people to maintain a sense of control over their lives, look forward to future experiences and achieve positive outcomes that enhanced their wellbeing and quality of life.