Allingham House Care Centre

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 felt able to share their views and the registered manager and staff took action to address any concerns and suggestions made, for examples in relation to activities and food. People’s specific needs, including cultural needs and preferences were respected and supported.

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.

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.

People generally felt listened to and involved. People told us they were able to do what they wished generally and felt able to raise concerns. One person told us, “I can do what I like, there are no restrictions, I say what I want and don’t feel limited, if I am unhappy, I just say.” People shared examples of how things had improved following feedback, for examples in relation to specific activities and meals provided.

Staff were respectful of peoples wishes and obtained consent before providing support, assurance was given to people where this was needed. Staff understood the importance of listening to people and involving them in decision making as much as possible.

There were a variety of processes in place to ensure that people’s views were obtained and listened to. These included resident and relative meetings, and a resident of the day review of people’s individual care. ‘You said… we did’ information boards provided updates to people about how their feedback had been used to make improvements across the home.

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.

People told us they were confident to speak up and considered they were listened to. One person told us, “I can do what I like; there are no restrictions.”

The service employed a diverse multi-cultural staff group. Staff were able to communicate with people whose first or preferred language was not English. The registered manager was able to provide specific examples of when this had helped to meet people’s needs and contributed towards people accepting care and support. Lifestyle co-ordinators told us how they always involved people from the specialist dementia unit in musical activities as they really enjoyed it. One person also liked to watch films in the cinema room with others; the service was inclusive, and staff were committed to providing good quality care to everyone supported at the home.

There were a range of processes in place for people to make their voices heard and people felt able to share their views and raise concerns. There was no evidence of people being disadvantaged for any reason. The registered manager had oversight of the home and analysed incidents to ensure lessons were learnt and people have positive experiences and outcomes. People’s cultural needs were recorded in the care plans and care and support was tailored to people as individuals. Gender-specific carer requests for personal care was respected and facilitated.

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.