Ashgrove Care Home - London

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 service met people’s needs.

The last rating for this key question was requires improvement. Under our new framework for assessments, concerns were previously identified under this key question are now linked to quality statements in the key question of caring.

At this assessment the rating for this key question has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 68 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People did not always receive person-centred care. We saw that choices were not always respected, and that people’s needs were not always being met. However, feedback from people and their relatives was generally positive. People were able to have showers and baths when they wanted, and they felt well cared for. Staff had a good knowledge of individual needs and worked with other professionals to monitor people’s health and conditions. Comments from people using the service included, “I am happy with the care they give me” and “They give me a bath and they help me with my exercise.”

The provider supported people to access the health and social care services they needed. Staff worked closely with external professionals and shared information to help ensure people received safe and appropriate care from others.

The provider offered a range of information for people using the service and their relatives. However, further improvements were needed. For example, the information within the care home was not always clear. Signage around the environment, information about activities, menus and how to access different services was not always presented in a clear and accessible format for people, especially those who could not read or did not speak English.

The registered manager told us they would provide information, including copies of care plans, in different formats and if requested. However, these were not routinely offered to people.

However, relatives told us they felt well informed about people’s care. They explained that staff contacted them if needed and asked for their views. People using the service told us staff usually explained about the care they were providing. Comments from people and their relatives included, “Staff talk nicely to me, and I can have a chat with management if anything crops up” and “[Person] has a note pad and uses this to communicate with the staff.”

The provider had systems for listening to people and obtaining their feedback. They held meetings for people using the service and relatives. The activities coordinators, managers and chef asked people for feedback on different aspects of the service. People and their relatives also told us they were sometimes asked to complete surveys about their experiences.

The provider had a suitable complaints procedure, and people knew what to do if they had any concerns. Their comments included, “I would go straight to the manager” and “I would talk to social services if I needed to.” The provider kept a record of complaints and concerns. We saw these had been investigated and appropriately responded to.

The provider supported people to access other services when they needed. They provided information about advocacy services, and they worked with local community and religious group to help meet people’s different needs. Staff supported people to attend different healthcare appointments and shared information about people’s needs with other professionals when they were unable to support people, such as emergency situations and hospital admissions.

The provider had procedures regarding equality and diversity. The staff had training to understand how to protect people’s human rights and respect diverse characteristics.

The provider supported people to plan for the future. They worked with palliative care teams and external professionals to help coordinate care for people who were at the end of their lives and dying. The staff had training to understand about how to provide good end of life care and how to ensure people were pain free and comfortable. Staff worked with people and their relatives to help identify any specific needs they had for their care and after their deaths.