Archived: Aston House Care 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 service met people’s needs.

The last rating for this key question was good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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.

People received person-centred care which met their needs and reflected their preferences. People were able to have baths or showers when they wanted. People presented as well groomed, in clean clothes. People told us their personal needs were met by staff who knew them well. A relative commented, “[Person] is well looked after. We feel comfortable that [they are] here. We do not have to worry.”

People were supported by familiar staff who knew them well. Staff worked closely with other professionals to ensure people received continuity of care.

The provider supported people to understand information about their care and the service. They created newsletters and shared information about special events. There were information posters around the service. There were themed areas including a cultural café, which staff used to help celebrate and give information about different cultures.

Staff wore name badges and introduced themselves when providing care.

The provider listened to and involved people. There was a committee of people living at the service who had regular meetings. There were also ‘in-house inspectors’ who were people with special roles to check aspects of the service. For example, checking food and housekeeping. The registered manager had asked a retired nurse who lived at the service to share learning with staff and test their clinical knowledge.

There were regular meetings which all people living at the home and their relatives were invited to.

People were asked to complete surveys about their experiences.

The registered manager used feedback from meetings, surveys, the committee and the work of the ‘in-house inspectors’ to help plan developments and changes for the service.

There was a suitable complaints procedure. People knew who to speak with if they had concerns.

Staff supported people to access other services when they needed. For example, escorting them on appointments and organising transport when they needed this.

People had equity in experience and outcomes. Staff completed training about equality and diversity. There were appropriate procedures in place. People told us they did not experience discrimination at the service.

The provider had been proactive in improving understanding about different cultures and religions. Another local manager was the organisation’s cultural ambassador. They worked with the registered managers to help develop different cultural awareness.

Staff supported people to plan for the future. Staff ensured care plans contained personalised information about people’s wishes for end-of-life care. Staff worked closely with people, their families and external professionals when their needs changed and they required different care or needed to move to other services.