Hazel Villa

We looked at all quality statements for Safe at this assessment. The service was safe. People were protected from bullying, harassment, avoidable harm and abuse. Systems were in place to keep people safe. Risks to individuals were managed well so that people were protected, and their freedom was supported and respected. There were enough suitable staff with the right competencies, knowledge, and attitude they needed to keep people safe, meet their needs and promote their rights. Staffing levels were based on the type and level of support each person needed throughout the day and staff were deployed in a way that was consistent with person centred care which included going out and planned activities. Staff received support and development to enable them to meet people’s needs and poor performance was addressed. The management of medicines was safe and good infection control practice was being followed. Transitions in care pathways were managed well and staff worked effectively with other health professionals and services to optimise support and continuity for people.

We looked at all quality statements for Effective at this assessment. The service was effective. Preadmission assessments were carried out to ensure the service was suitable to meet the needs of the individual. Assessments completed translated into person-centred, effective care plans. People were supported during mealtimes to ensure they were eating and drinking enough.

We looked at all quality statements for Caring at this assessment. The service was caring. The provider had effective systems in place to deliver a consistently caring service. Staff were seen to have positive interactions with people and spoke about them in a kind and caring way. People’s individual needs and preferences were understood. Staff had sufficient guidance to respond to people’s immediate care needs and reduce the risk of avoidable distress and discomfort.

We looked at all quality statements for Responsive at this assessment. The service was responsive. People’s care, treatment and support promoted equality, removed barriers and protected their rights. The service met people’s individualised and preferences, supporting their autonomy, independence and involvement in the community. People were listened to and were involved in the life of the service and had equal access to social and leisure opportunities.

We looked at all quality statements for Well-led at this assessment. The service was Well-led. The provider had safe and effective governance systems. There was an inclusive and positive culture of continuous learning and improvement. This was based on meeting the needs of people who use services and wider communities, and all leaders and staff share this. Leaders proactively support staff and collaborate with people who use services and partners to deliver care that is safe, integrated and person-centred. Leaders drove efforts to increase sustainability, and design services to reduce inequalities for staff and people who use services. There were effective governance and management systems. Information and data are used appropriately to check risk, performance and quality of care.