Ashview

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

At the last inspection, the provider was in breach of the regulations because they had failed to ensure people were always supported in a dignified and respectful way. At this assessment, we found people were supported by caring and kind staff who were friendly and knowledgeable about their needs and personalities. Improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of the regulations relating to the question of Caring. People were treated with respect and were valued for who they were. People had opportunities to be independent and given choice and control in their lives. People’s capacity to make decisions had been assessed and legal processes were in place to protect their rights.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People told us they were treated with dignity and respect. A person said, “We talked about the way everyone should be treated when we had the meeting and we agreed to the values that are put up on the wall in the hallway as a reminder.” A family member said, “Name of person] is very happy and very settled.”

Training had been undertaken by staff to understand how to communicate with people and to work with them in a compassionate way. A staff member said, “[Name of person] has changed so much that they can now enjoy much more. They are happier and more alive.”

Professionals were positive about the improvements to the service.

People's care plans had been updated and were written in a person-centred way using respectful language. People’s daily records showed staff wrote in a dignified and positive way detailing people’s daily lives, their feelings and achievements. The manager demonstrated how people were supported to try new experiences, develop new skills and gain independence. There was photo evidence of people’s everyday lives which showed independence, personal achievements and a good quality of life.

People were treated as individuals and respected for their personalities and uniqueness.

Staff were enthusiastic about getting to know how to support people in different and individual ways. This especially included people who did not communicate verbally and used body language and gestures to express themselves.

Staff used people’s names to get their attention, gave direct eye and physical contact and were aware of people’s individual communication styles. Staff engaged with people to find out what they wanted and what choices to make. They had a clear and friendly conversation style and used humour appropriately.

We saw in the care plans that people’s protected characteristics were not always fully recorded to consider their religious beliefs, ethnicity and culture and sexual orientation. The manager agreed this was an oversight and said they would explore with people and those who knew them how to uphold their rights and freedom to be themselves.

People told us they were encouraged to be independent. A person said, “The staff help me be as independent as possible and that is really important to me.” A family member told us, “[Name of person] is coming along in leaps and bounds by pushing them along to be able to help themselves.”

There was an increased focus on promoting people’s physical and psychological independence by using encouragement, affirmation and positive risk taking. Staff were very positive about this individualised approach to working with people.

We observed how people responded to the way they were spoken with and assisted by staff, and they were comfortable and relaxed. Staff told us there were enough staff to enable people to follow their routines, such as go to work or volunteering and for others to enjoy social and leisure times, both at home and in the community.

People’s care plans identified their wishes and aspirations and how they could be supported to live a full life with choice and control.

People’s needs, views, wishes and comfort were anticipated, and staff avoided any preventable discomfort, concern or distress. For example, staff knew how to introduce us to people to ensure they were not uncomfortable or distressed by our presence.

Staff were alert to people’s needs and took time to observe, communicate and engage people in discussions and conversations. Staff responded in the most appropriate way to respect people’s wishes.

Staff quickly recognised when people needed support and used appropriate forms of words to assist them, for example to protect their dignity.

People were supported by a staff team who felt valued by their manager and who had created an atmosphere and culture of mutual respect and working collaboratively. Staff had the opportunity to provide feedback, raise concerns and suggest ways to improve the service. People and staff worked well together to develop the service and staff were respected for their inclusive approach.

There were systems to reduce barriers for staff with protected characteristics and help ensure they had equal access to the workplace and be able to fulfil their role.