Roche Abbey Care 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 and relatives spoken with told us they had not been asked for feedback about the service. The provider had not ensured there were robust systems in place to ensure people and their relatives views were actively sought so they could be used to drive improvements at the service.

This service scored 68 (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.

People and relatives told us they had not been asked for feedback about the service. The provider had not ensured there were robust systems in place to ensure people and their relatives views were actively sought so they could be used to drive improvements at the service. We received mixed views about meal provision. One person said, “On and off [food], some days I like it sometimes not, but in the main it’s alright.” Another person said, “The cook visited me to discuss what food I liked, and I gave her some recipes.” Another person said, “Oh it’s good [food], and you can have as much as you want.” The provider had not ensured there were robust systems in place to ensure people and their relatives views were actively sought so they could be used to drive improvements at the service. We received mixed views from people and relatives about the quality of care provided at the service. People and relatives spoken with told us they had not been asked for feedback about the service. They had not been asked to complete a survey or invited to attend any residents or relative's meetings.

The current management team acknowledged they needed to improve outcomes for people. Staff told us there had been several managers who had stayed a while them moved on. Staff had found this unsettling and left them without clear guidance and direction.

The provider had not ensured there were robust systems in place to ensure people recieved good outcomes. People and relatives views were actively sought so they could be used to drive improvements at the service. We received mixed views from people and relatives about the quality of care provided at the service. People and relatives spoken with told us they had not been asked for feedback about the service. Some people had not been asked to complete a survey or invited to attend any residents or relative's meetings.

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.