Edgemont View Nursing Home

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 were supported to give feedback and understand their rights. They felt staff listened to them and made changes where possible or necessary. Relatives felt able to contact members of the management team or other staff if they had concerns or problems. Staff looked for ways to address the barriers people might face to improve people’s care and achieve equity. Staff told us they were committed to providing high quality care, which met people’s individual needs. There was an awareness of equality and human rights and legal requirements throughout the organisation. Staff were aware of people’s protected characteristics. They knew how to tailor the support and adjust depending on people’s individual needs.

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.

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.

Relatives spoke positively about the staff team. They said they have not witnessed any barriers to people’s care. One relative said, “There are no barriers they will do anything to help.” Relatives felt able to contact members of the management team or other staff if they had concerns or problems. One relative said, “The staff are very good at communicating and we use the online portal so if she is not well or in bed asleep then we delay our visit.”

The staff told us they used a number of methods to communicate with people. For example, one staff member told us, “Verbal communication with residents who are capable is done, along with questions and responses to engage and show understanding. Some conversations are summarized at the end, for residents who may need this. Non-verbal cues, body language, facial expression and variation in voice tone are observed also.” Another example was, “Residents are able to communicate by pointing at flash cards. Some residents are able to communicate verbally but may be hard of hearing.” The staff and the registered manager confirmed there were no barriers to the care and support people received. Communication was always adapted to suit the needs of each person.

People’s specific needs, including cultural needs, communication and preferences were respected and supported. Each person’s care plan contained information about how the staff should support people. Where people have different levels of communication, this was recorded. Care plans were person centred and considered all aspects of a person’s life, including, sexuality, medical history, mental capacity and activities and interests. There were multi-disciplinary records in place and regular reviews of people’s care plans and risk assessments to ensure they were a true reflection. Each person had an allocated key worker who helped to oversee their overall needs. People met with their keyworker regularly and discussed the care which they received. Communication was also discussed with people’s views sought. They were asked if any improvements could be made. People’s relatives were also engaged in the process, with their views sought.

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.