Allonsfield 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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 64 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. People told us that staff knew them well including their likes and dislikes and respected their preferences. Staff approached and communicated with people appropriately, which enabled people to make decisions about their care and support. One person shared, “I feel comfortable here, am not pushed into anything. I have 1 carer either a man or woman. I don’t mind, have a shower now and again or get strip washed. I decide. I choose my clothes.” Relatives said they felt involved in the care arrangements and were kept informed of any developments. A relative shared, “Family member has a key worker; a senior who oversees things and lets us know if there are any issues, when the GP visits. Communication is good, feel in the loop.” Relatives described a friendly, warm and hospitable culture in the service. A relative said, “The staff are fantastic, really made [family member] feel welcome when they moved in, it really helped them to adjust. Staff keep us updated with information about any health changes and what [family member] has been up to. It’s given [family member] a new lease of life.” People were offered the opportunity to take part in meaningful activities led by dedicated staff inside and outside the service. This promoted people’s social, cognitive and physical wellbeing. During the morning of the assessment 3 therapy dogs visited the service with their handlers. People told how much they enjoyed these sessions as well as accessing the onsite farm, planned excursions and visiting entertainers to the service. One person said, “I love the weekly coffee mornings when the dogs come, that’s a highlight for me.” A relative said, “There are often activity photographs on their [social media page], exercises; chair yoga, every day they have something on.”

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.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. Staff and the registered manager supported people to express their views and to be involved in decisions about their care and support. Care records reflected people’s participation. People and relatives told us they felt able to raise any issues with the staff and management team and were confident that these would be addressed. One person said, “I have got no complaints, it is comfortable here. They [staff] are nice. I feel very safe. If something was troubling me I know the staff or the manager would fix it.” A relative commented, “I think the staff are good at engaging [family member] to join in and have a say in what’s going on. Staff listen and respect what is said.” People and relatives were encouraged to give their feedback through meetings and quality assurance surveys. Their feedback was gathered and reviewed by the registered manager and used to continually develop the service. For example, people had made suggestions about the meals and snacks and the catering team had accommodated this. Where concerns and complaints had been raised these were investigated, responded to with lessons learnt shared with the staff to prevent recurrence.

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 and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Staff completed training in equality and diversity to understand and reduce inequalities or prejudices that affected outcomes for people. The provider’s equality and discrimination policies were in line with current best practice guidance. People’s care records evidenced where their protected characteristics had been considered and reasonable adjustments had been made. For example: if someone had a physical disability and required mobility aids to improve their experience then the appropriate support and equipment was provided.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. People and relatives told us they were involved in decisions about their care and support arrangements. Care records included information about advanced care planning. Advance care planning enables a person to express and have documented their preferences and priorities of how they wish to be cared for as their illness progresses. This supported staff, the registered manager and relevant healthcare professionals involved to understand what's important to the person and to care for them in the way they'd like. Care records for people who were at the end of their life recorded important discussions regarding their end of life wishes. They included details regarding contact with family and friends, preferences regarding treatment such as cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and recommended summary plan for emergency care and treatment (ReSPECT) forms, religious needs and any pre-made funeral plans. Where people had declined to participate in discussions around future care planning this was noted on their care records and respected.