Aster Care

Safe - this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

People received a safe service. Comments included, “He is well looked after. They take the time to have a chat with him whilst doing what they have to with him. We are happy as a family with the care he receives.”

People and staff were encouraged to raise concerns. Complaints were taken seriously by the service and used as an opportunity for learning. One person told us the current manager would take immediate action when they raised any concerns and they felt safe, heard and valued by the current management.

The provider had systems in place to investigate accidents and incidents to ensure there were lessons learned to embed good practices. Risks to people’s safety were assessed and person centred plans were in place to support people to remain safe.

People were protected from the risk of harm or abuse by staff who understood their safeguarding responsibilities. Safeguarding incidents were appropriately reported to the relevant agencies and investigations undertaken.

Effective recruitment practices were followed before new staff were employed to work with people. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Staff received the necessary training for their role and said they were supported by management and other colleagues.

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

Assessments considered people’s health, care, wellbeing, and communication needs, to enable them to receive person centred care and support that had the best possible outcomes. Care plans were reviewed regularly and updated and amended accordingly where people’s care had changed.

The service worked with other health and social care professionals to support people and provide consistency in care. People’s nutrition and hydration needs were met.

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.

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

People and their relatives told us staff treated them treated with kindness, compassion and dignity in their day-to-day care and support.

During our visit we observed staff treating people with kindness and compassion. We observed people were comfortable in the presence of staff. We saw when people were approached by staff, they responded to them with smiles and conversation which showed people were comfortable and relaxed with staff. Staff took their time with people and did not rush or hurry them.

Staff knew people well and understood how to meet their needs, including their preferences, wishes, personal histories, backgrounds and potential.

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

Care plans reflected people’s care and support needs. They were personalised and contained information on how people wished to receive their care and support. Care plans were reviewed regularly, and changes recorded where required.

There was good management and leadership at the service. There was a clear organisational structure. Staff and managers worked in partnership with key organisations to support care provision, service development and joined-up care.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. Audits were completed periodically throughout the year. Where improvements had been identified, a home action plan was in place which identified how these were to be met.