Aspens Supported Living & Outreach (Kent)

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 remained 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 told us they liked the staff, that they were kind and friendly and that sometimes they shared a joke. One person gave a ‘thumbs up’ sign to each member of staff when asked what they were like when supporting them. Relatives confirmed that staff were kind and caring. Comments included, “The atmosphere is really friendly and welcoming. It’s lovely a place to be”; “The carers are compassionate and do their best”; and “She likes the staff and they like her.”

We observed staff engaging with people in an affectionate way. Staff showed patience, and used a light-hearted approach, with humour to encourage a person to come out of their room. Some people approached staff for affection which staff gave. When staff spoke about people and described their needs, they did so in a respectful manner focusing on people’s strengths and achievements.

Health and social care partners gave positive feedback about the relationship between people and staff. Comments included, “I have found key members of staff caring and knowledgeable about people’s interests and motivators”; and “Staff demonstrated a positive relationship with them”. One of the supported living services had received a compliment from a health care partner about the relationship between people and staff. ‘There was a really lovely vibe between him and the staff. He was always included in the conversation and he seemed very happy”.

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 cultural and faith needs were documented in people’s care plans together with their strengths, abilities and preferences. This included people’s preferred routines and how they liked to spend their time. For example, one person’s nighttime routine guided staff not to make eye contact with the person or talk to them as this had the effect of waking them up when they were getting ready to go to sleep.

People told us that special events were celebrated such as holidays and birthdays, which was important to them. One person said, “I had a moving in party, a birthday party and New Years eve party. I stayed up until 1 in the morning. Staff supported me to stay up.” A relative told us, “It works for my relative as she wants to be around people. She loves the community and celebrating birthdays and going to cafés and speaking with people. And this is what she does”.

People’s homes were personalised with photographs and pictures. Some people showed us their rooms and all the things that were important to them that they contained. A health care partner told us about staff’s interactions with one specific person, “The individual support reflected the quality of care and rapport within the staff team”.

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

People told us they made choices such as how to spend their money and where to go. People who lived in their own homes said that they enjoyed their independence. Daily records showed that people were offered choices such as what they wanted to eat and if they preferred a bath or shower. Objects of reference were used to help people make choices or understand what was going to happen next. Objects of reference arereal, physical objects used alongside spoken words to give visual and sensory information.

Relatives said that people were given choices and that their independence was promoted. Comments included, “Supported living is a different creature because it gives them more independence”; and, “They do give him choice. Staff advocate for their independence and for them to do what they would like. They really push his independence”. A health care partner said about one person, “Notably, he has become more open to trying new foods and drinks, which marks a positive step in his personal development”.

We observed staff valued people for their achievements. One person was really engaged in watching a video staff had taken of him completing a word search. Staff spoke to this person and praised him for his skill in completing this task. This further enhanced the person’s enjoyment of the activity. We also saw staff supporting and encouraging a person to make a meal with prompting and praise.

People and relatives told us they took part in routine tasks and responsibilities around their home such as food shopping, hoovering, cleaning and cooking. Relative’s comments included, “She prepares her meals with one to one support. She chooses what she wants to eat”; and, “He does cooking and his washing; more than he used to do at home”.

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.

People’s care records provided staff with enough information on how to support people who could not verbalise if they were in pain or distress. They described how changes in people’s face, skin, breathing or body posture could indicate if the person was content or unhappy.

Staff were confident they understood people’s verbal and non-verbal clues to gauge if people were happy and content and when they were not their usual selves. Daily notes detailed how staff recognised people’s moods and how they spent time reassuring people when they had become anxious or upset. For example, there was a detailed description of how one person was gently rocking when their parents came to visit. Staff understood that for this person, rocking was a sign that they were happy to see their family.

Comments from relatives were positive about how staff responded to people’s immediate needs. One relative told us, “Staff are brilliant when things do happen; with phoning ambulances and things like that and they’ll always tell me”. Another relative said, “Oh yes, staff know her really well. They know what mood she when wakes up. They’re so responsive”.

The service was working towards prioritising workforce wellbeing to ensure staff were supported and enabled to always deliver person-centred care.

The provider had identified key themes from the last staff survey which had taken place in 2024. These included staff requesting more well-being checks from managers, and more opportunities for career development. The executive team had assigned these areas to specific teams to make the necessary improvements to staff wellbeing. We found there remained mixed feedback from staff about how well they felt listened to and valued.

Staff wellbeing was supported through staff meetings, supervisions and annual appraisals. These meetings gave staff opportunities to discuss best practice as well as their own staff development. Staff development was encouraged through supporting staff to undertake health and social care qualifications.