Avenues South Hampshire Services

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 changed to requires improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

This service scored 60 (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 did not always treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion, or respect their privacy and dignity.
We observed staff spoke to people in a kind and caring way and participated in activities and hobbies with people during our visits. However, we received mixed feedback from relatives regarding the kindness and care staff demonstrated when supported people. One relative said, “Some more [caring] than others” and another relative said, “Some staff are kind and caring and others are not, and it is not person centred.”
 

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.
Staff told us they treated people as individuals. One staff said, “One size fits all doesn’t exist, staff understand this and treat people as individuals.” However, we received mixed feedback from relatives about treating people as individuals and supporting people according to their own preference.
We reviewed people’s care records and found information relating to their personal likes and dislikes, and their preferences. However, we found the provider was not always able to provide information about people’s individual needs. For example, we asked the provider about anyone using the service with any specific religious or cultural needs and they confirmed there were not.However, we found 1 person had specific religious needs, and this information was not captured in their hospital passport at the time of our assessment.This meant managers were unable to give us specific information according to people’s individual needs which could also affect a person's care and treatment.
 

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.
Staff also told us about people’s restrictions. For example, one staff said, “Some people have a DoLS in place, it’s in their best interests, I don’t know the process, but you have to trust the managers are doing it right.” Another staff told us, “People make choices every day, when to get up or go to bed, what to wear, eat, where they want to go” and, “We have seen lots of positive changes with the new provider, people are now allowed to make choices, even if they are unwise.”
We observed people were not always empowered to have choice and control over their own care. For example, we observed staff were preparing the same dinner for 2 service users, and this had to be given early on this day due to one person’s individual needs. Staff told us sometimes people did participate in tasks such as baking. However, we did not observe people were always encouraged and supported to engage in these activities.
 

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.
We observed staff supported people when they presented with signs of distress and anxiety. Staff were observed supporting people with objects they enjoyed using such as balloons and footballs. People were also supported to enjoy sensory activities in their rooms.
We noted from people’s care records, staff contacted healthcare professionals when required following events such as seizures.
 

The provider cared about and promoted the well-being of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.
We received mixed feedback from staff. Although staff in general felt supported. One staff said, “I feel listened to yes, but not always valued.” Another staff told us, “The manager is very good, doesn’t allow anything to be missed.