Azalea House

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

As part of this assessment, we looked at 2 quality statements for the key question of responsive. These were ‘person-centred care and equity in experiences and outcomes.’ People were involved in planning and making shared decisions about their care and treatment, so it was centred around them and their needs. Staff empowered people to give their views and understand their rights, including their rights to equality and their human rights.

This service scored 82 (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 truly personalised care that was responsive to their needs and the registered manager and staff team constantly looked for ways that would improve people's lives, health, and wellbeing. For example, when a person first went to live at Azalea House their lifestyle, hobbies, cultural and physical needs were considered. Then they were matched with a compatible staff member who would be able to offer them the support they required and be able to be a mentor and coach to enable and empower the person. For example, 1 person was linked with a staff member of the same cultural beliefs who supported them to attend their place of worship and practice their faith. Another person was matched compatibly with a staff member who had the same interests regarding body building and personal fitness.

The service was creative and innovative in supporting people to live well and independently, especially those living with addiction and mental health needs. Care and support plans included a range of personalised information about people, their history, and personal interests. Talking about the values of the service, 1 staff member said, “We do support people to have a meaningful life so they can have the best life they can. We always try to get people involved in decisions about their care so they get the individual care they want.”

We saw that staff spoke to people with respect and treated people as individuals. People's support was tailored to their needs and preferences, and we saw that staff supported people in line with their wishes.

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.

The provider was exceptionally responsive to the views and recommendations of people and staff for improving the care people received. One person said, "The staff always ask me for suggestions. I feel they do value my opinion. A relative told us, "The manager and the staff contact me often, they keep me updated and always involve me in my [family members] care. I can give suggestions and ideas and the manager always checks to see if we are happy with the care. I know I can always call the office at any time, and the manager will always stop what they are doing and take time to talk with me.”

People felt empowered by the management and staff team to give their views and understand their rights, including their rights to equality and their human rights. The registered manager informed us that actions were taken as a result of people’s feedback. Examples of these included people saying they did not want scheduled resident meetings, some wanted 1:1 meetings which was introduced following the feedback. The template for the 1-1 ‘Lets talk’ sessions was changed because people did not like the format. There had been changes made regularly to the menu and 1 person had moved rooms as per their request. People said that they wanted a particular TV subscription and new smart TVs which was actioned. One person wanted to get some rabbits and the staff supported that.

Engaging with people and finding out their views took place in several different ways. People had 1-1 talk therapy sessions and were asked to provide feedback via satisfaction surveys, suggestion boxes, and focus groups to collect ideas and opinions. The registered manager told us their door was always open so people could talk with them at any time. Records confirmed there were annual reviews of people's care where they were asked to have their say about the quality of their care. People were aware of the complaint's procedure, and this was available in an easy read format. Effective communication systems were in place to ensure that staff were kept up to date with any changes to people's care and support systems to staff. They confirmed they had regular staff meetings and 1 to 1 meetings with a senior staff member.

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.