St Andrew's Healthcare - 17 The Avenue

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. This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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.

The provider always treated the person with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Guidance for staff of how to meet the person’s care and support needs reflected the importance of providing care and support based on kindness, compassion and dignity. Information recorded by staff in handover and care records about the person was completed respectfully.

The person using the service told us they liked the staff and how they involved and listened to them.

Observations of staff engaging with the person was positive. On the day of the inspection permanent staff were supporting the person, they demonstrated a good awareness of the person’s routines and had a positive, respectful caring approach. We observed staff communicate effectively with people who used the service and with each other.

Feedback from an external professional was positive about staff’s communication skills, and reflected how this was professional and respectful towards them as an external professional.

There were no restrictions on visitors.

The provider treated the person as an individual and made sure their care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences. They took account of the person’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Individual needs were respected and promoted. Information about the person’s equality and diversity needs and unique backgrounds, had been assessed and used to develop care plans. Guidance for staff included important information about the support required in relation to the person’s routines, preferences, what was important to them.

The environment had been adapted to accommodate this such as a visual doorbell. Interpreters in British Sign Language were available, and deaf staff were also appointed.

Staff told us they found guidance of how to provide personalised care and support was sufficiently detailed, kept up to date and was supportive. A staff member said, “We have information about the person’s interests and activities they like which we support them with, we also help them to achieve their goals in life.”

The person was supported with their individual interests and hobbies. We saw they had been supported to develop an activity planner, whilst the person chose daily how they wished to spend their time the activity planner was useful to engage the person in activities they had identified they would like to do.

On the day of the inspection we observed the person being supported with their inhouse daily routine and then was supported by staff to attend a community activity. Staff spent time with the person interacting and communicating effectively and supporting meaningful activity the person enjoyed.

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

Staff continually supported and promoted the person’s independence. For example, staff supported the person to participate in daily living tasks, such as cleaning their bedroom, doing their laundry, and planning, shopping and cooking meals of their choice. The person was also supported to access the community with staff developing their awareness and skills in using public transport.

The person had complete choice and control of how they spent their times such as what time to go to bed and get up and the activities they participated in.

We observed positive staff engagement with the person where individual independence, choice and control was promoted. For example, we saw the person being supported in activities of their choice.

The provider listened to and understood the person’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to the person’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

We observed how staff were attentive and supportive to the person’s needs. They provided reassurance when required and were at hand to respond in a timely manner.

Staffing requirements were assessed and planned so enough staff with the right skills were available to the person. Overall, the person was supported by permanent staff who knew them well. Improvements were being made to recruit additional permanent staff. Further improvements to ensure all staff were trained in British Sign Language was required and this was known, and plans were in place.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Overall, staff were positive about the support they received from the management team. They raised no concerns about their safety. Staff received ongoing refresher training, regular opportunities to discuss their work, training and development needs. Staff wellbeing was promoted through training and support.

Staff had access to policies and procedures to support them such as how to speak up if they had any concerns.

Staff had access to an employee assistance and trauma line, occupational health service, various support groups and access to staff benefits including swimming and gym passes. The provider also had a staff recognition awards scheme.