Ashlodge

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

People received care that was personalised to them. Their needs had been fully assessed prior to moving to Ashlodge to ensure that staff were able to support them in a safe and responsive manner. People were involved in the planning of their care, as were their relatives or representatives were appropriate. People had choice and control over how their care was delivered. People were given the opportunity to feedback their views to the registered manager, to allow activities to be shaped around their wishes and preferences. Staff treated people as individuals and respected their needs and wishes.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

Staff knew people well and respected them as individuals. Staff spoke sensitively about people’s individual needs and choices and knew when people needed alone time or when they needed more support. Staff told us that people’s care plans and documentation were available to guide them on how to support people and these reflected individual needs. Staff described how they met one person’s dietary preference as they were vegan. A relative confirmed how staff went out of their way to meet their relatives’ dietary needs. A visiting professional confirmed that staff worked in a person-centred way.

Although there were processes in place to promote people's individuality, documentation was not always up to date and a problem with the Wi-Fi connection in the building hindered some being updated. The registered manager was working to address this and was available to people and their relatives to discuss changing health needs. There were good links with the community and a regular activity programme was arranged with visiting entertainers which people were involved in shaping.

People were treated as individuals and with respect. Staff knew people well and worked closely alongside all the individuals living at the service to ensure they delivered care which was in line with their needs and wishes. For example, staff knew that one person was not religious but as they began to lose their memory they began to talk about religion. This was explored with the person to establish how best to support them with this changing need. The registered manager spoke with each person on a regular basis to give them opportunity to feedback and discuss anything they would want to change. People were involved in the planning of their care and the registered manager wrote the risk assessments and care plans in consultation with people or their relatives if appropriate.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.