Somerset House

“There were enough appropriately skilled staff to meet people’s needs. People could communicate with staff who supported them consistently and understood their individual communication needs. People’s physical, mental and social needs were holistically assessed. Care and treatment was based on current best practice and delivered in a coordinated way with involvement from other relevant organisations and health and social care professionals.”

“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. People had up to date risk assessments and staff regularly reviewed these. Staff responded appropriately to changing risk, and we observed care was delivered with compassion and respect.”

“Staff promoted independence and supported people to make their own choices, encouraging active involvement in day-to-day decisions, at every opportunity. The registered manager reviewed feedback received and shared learning across the staff team to improve service delivery.”

“There was an open and transparent culture within the management team with a focus on providing good care. The registered manager had been in post for a long time, providing stability and continuity. People and those important to them, where possible, were involved in planning their care. Good communication and the active involvement of the registered manager ensured any risk of a closed culture was minimised. Local partners in health and social care were positive about the culture at the home and had no concerns.”

“The service was led by a committed registered manager. Staff described a positive and open culture and felt supported and able to raise concerns or suggestions. The provider had established quality assurance and governance arrangements, ensuring consistent oversight and good standards of care. Concerns and complaints were managed appropriately.”