Ashton View Nursing Home

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 since this provider took over ownership of the home. 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 70 (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 people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People and relatives spoke positively about the care and support received and the staff who provided this. People told us they were treated with dignity respect, with staff seeking their consent before providing any assistance. Comments included, “The staff are all lovely, they ask how I have got on when I have been out and have a nice cup of tea waiting for me when I get back”, “Staff always ask if I’m ready for a wash etc, and they knock on the door even when its open” and “I’ve never witnessed staff not being kind, they are lovely, honestly.”

During the inspection we observed a number of positive interactions between people and staff. For example, on the Evan’s household, we observed a person being supported to eat a meal. This was done calmly, at the person’s own pace, with the staff member waiting until each mouthful was finished before offering the next forkful. The staff member spoke to the person throughout, checking they were okay and enjoying their meal and providing reassurance. After supporting this person, they went to support another person in exactly the same way. We also noted staff taking the opportunity to sit in the lounge area and speak with people when completing paperwork. It was evident people felt comfortable in staff’s presence.

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

People’s care records explained any specific personal, cultural, social or religious needs and how these would be met. We noted individual strategies and approaches were used with people, to ensure staff communicated effectively and people’s care and support met their specific needs.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care and treatment. People’s social and recreational needs were not consistently met due to activity provision being limited.

People, relatives and staff commented on the lack of meaningful activities being available for people on a consistent basis. The previous activities coordinator had left, and their replacement had not yet commenced employment. As a result, activities were largely down to staff to facilitate, though a coordinator from another of the provider’s homes had recently started to spend 1 day a week at Ashton View completing activities. Observations during our site visits showed staff had limited time to engage in activities due to being busy with care tasks. Care records supported this view, as they contained very few entries relating to daily activity completion. The provider had arranged larger events such as singers visiting the home and trips to local places of interest, which people said they enjoyed.

People were offered choice and their independence promoted as much as possible. Staff explained the ways in which they did this, such as asking people what they would like to wear and offering options at meal times. When completing tasks such as personal care, people were encouraged to wash and dry as much of themselves as they could.

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.

Observations of care during site visits, showed people’s requests for help, either made verbally or via call bells were responded to as soon as possible. Staff were observed providing reassurance to people as and when required. Some staff told us staffing pressures affected their ability to respond as promptly as they would like, however, we identified no impact on people as a result.

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

The provider asked staff to complete psychosocial safety surveys. These assessed how psychological factors and the surrounding social environment impacted on staff’s physical and mental wellness and their ability to carry out their roles effectively. This survey gathered feedback on a range of areas including communication, staff relationships, whether staff felt able to speak freely and demands of the job.

Monthly wellbeing committee meeting were held, which all staff were welcome to attend. Processes were in place to support staff with their mental health or who may be at crisis point. Staf also had access to 10 free counselling sessions via links the provider had formed with a carer’s charity.