Ashlynn Grange

In the months prior to the inspection, the provider had received support from the local authority to make improvements at the service. We found many actions had been taken, and improvements to service provision was apparent in many areas. However, governance, systems and audit processes still required review, development, and time to embed, which was recognised by the provider's senior leadership team. The senior leadership team told us they were committed to making and sustaining ongoing improvements and were responsive to our feedback during the inspection process.

We have made a recommendation for the provider to review accessible information signage within the environment.

People told us they felt safe at the service. The environment was clean, and infection control processes were in place. There was enough staff to support people safely, and the provider undertook safe recruitment procedures.

People, and their relatives, gave mixed feedback for their involvement in the care planning process. However, responsive end of life care planning took place, and relatives told us staff did regularly involve them in this process. Activities for people had not always been consistently available and planned. However, a new activities team had been appointed at the service during the inspection time frame.

People, and their relatives, gave us mixed feedback of their experience and knowledge of how to raise a concern or complaint. The provider's representatives had plans to improve communication information and systems.

People's needs were assessed prior to them moving into the service. Staff received the required support and training to enable them to meet people's needs. Trained chefs were employed at the service and staff

supported people to receive a balanced diet. People told us they received healthcare reviews and support when it was needed, however, some people's relatives felt this area could be further improved upon.

Most staff treated people with respect and dignity. People told us they received good care and support from staff.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.