Forest Care Village Elstree and Borehamwood

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

Many people told us they did not feel involved in planning or reviewing their care. There was insufficient guidance for staff to know how to meet people’s communication needs.

This service scored 71 (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.

Many people said they did not always feel involved in planning their care and had never seen their care plan. A person told us staff did not spend time talking with them and felt the reason for this might be because, due to their medical condition, they were hard to understand. During the site visits we found staff made little attempt to communicate with people who were withdrawn or who had limited verbal communication.

Staff gave mixed feedback about whether people most likely to experience inequality were cared for well. Some staff told us everyone at the service received good care. However, other staff were concerned the needs of people living with dementia were sometimes overlooked. The manager was unable to provide us with evidence people were involved in reviews of their care plans. The provider recognised this was an area for improvement and told us they would be reviewing this process.

People’s care plans did not always include enough guidance for staff to recognise their needs. For example, for people who did not communicate verbally, they did not state how they indicated pain. There was some information about people’s communication needs such as when a person’s first language was not English. However, there was little evidence to show how people’s opportunities to communicate their needs were maximised, such as using communication aids, or staff learning key words in their first language. One person’s care plan stated they did use a communication aid, but when asked about this, they said they did not use it.

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.