Orchard Views Residential 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

Care records often lacked detail of how people and their relatives were involved in decisions about their care. Relatives told us they had not been asked for feedback about the service and were not aware of resident’s or relative meetings taking place. People did not always receive the care and support they needed or in line with their preferences. The provider had not ensured there were robust systems in place to ensure people and their relatives views were actively sought so they could be used to drive improvements at the service.

This service scored 62 (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.

Relatives told us their views were not actively sought. They had not been given a survey or been invited to a residents or relative’s meeting. We received mixed views from relatives about whether staff kept them well informed. One relative told us, “I know if I can’t get to visit him, he is being cared for and they will let me know about anything I need to know about.” Another told us, “They can be a bit disorganised at times. I have missed calls from them and then when I ring back, they can’t find out why there was anyone ringing me.”

Staff had received training in equality and diversity and policies and procedures were in place to support this. Staff told us there was not enough staff to make sure people received care that was consistently safe, good quality care that met people’s needs. Staff told us they did not feel supported and were not encouraged to share their views on how the service could improve.

Systems in place did not always support people to be included and have the same opportunities as others to receive the care and support of their choice based on their specific needs. Care plans required more detailed information on how people were supported with all their cultural and religious needs including at end of life. The provider had not ensured the views of people and relatives were actively sought to improve the quality of care provided. Care records reviewed showed little involvement from people and their relatives in their care planning.

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.