• Care Home
  • Care home

78 Hoylake Crescent

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

78 Hoylake Crescent, Ickenham, Uxbridge, UB10 8JF (01895) 472798

Provided and run by:
AKM Care

Assessment report published 27 November 2025

On this page

Responsive

Requires improvement

9 November 2025

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 changed to requires improvement.

This meant people’s needs were not always met.

We identified further breaches of legal regulations relating to person-centred care.

This service scored 57 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Person-centred Care

Score: 1

People did not always receive person-centred care which met their needs or reflected their preferences. They were not always given choices about their care. People were not always involved in planning personalised activities or meaningful reviews of their care. Staff kept records of people’s activities and how they had spent their time. These indicated people did not take part in a variety of meaningful activities and most days spent time at home watching television.

Staff held monthly meetings with people to discuss their care. The template for these meetings included objective setting. Records indicated this did not happen. For example, the objective for 1 person was to be supported to go to the shop to buy sweets and a newspaper. This objective was recorded each month. There were no objectives for people relating to their mental health recovery, independent living skills or mental wellbeing. There were no therapeutic plans to help people with these areas. People confirmed this. A person commented, “During the day I watch TV and sit. Sometimes I walk to the shop to get biscuits.” Another person explained, “I used to be able to do things for myself, but now I do not. That is what living here has done to me.”

The management team explained they supported 1 person to create emails, undertake online shopping and complete online forms.

Care provision, Integration and continuity

Score: 3

The provider worked with health and social care professionals to make sure people received continuity of care. They liaised with others and shared information about people’s needs. People were cared for by the same familiar staff who worked in a consistent way.

Providing Information

Score: 2

The provider shared information with people, but this was not always accurate. For example, menus, planned activities and information about staff on duty changed and people were not told about these changes.

There were information posters on display to help people understand about fire safety, emergency situations as well as recognising and reporting abuse.

Listening to and involving people

Score: 2

People did not always feel they were listened to or involved in running the service. People told us they were not given choices about events or menus. They were not asked for their views about staff or involved in staff recruitment and selection. People told us staff chose menus. They said there had been some group meetings in the past but told us they would like more opportunities to share their views about the service.

Key staff met with people each month to discuss their care. However, they did not always use these meetings as an opportunity to plan changes or improvements in people’s care or to find out what they would like to be done differently.

Equity in access

Score: 3

Staff supported people to access the services they needed. The provider arranged for transport and staff escorts to appointments. Staff supported people to communicate with other health professionals when needed and to understand information about their health.

 

Equity in experiences and outcomes

Score: 3

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

Planning for the future

Score: 2

People were not always supported to plan for the future. Some people told us about personal goals they had and how they wanted to achieve these. They said staff did not support them to work towards these. For example, learning independent living skills or preparing to move to more independent settings.