Cedardale Residential 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

The design and layout of the service had been based on people’s needs. For example, there were multiple directional signs around the service which included words and pictures. Signs on communal rooms such as bathrooms and toilets also had pictorial signs to aid people’s movements around the service. People’s feedback had been sought through resident meetings and acted on to make improvements to the service people received.

This service scored 75 (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.

The activity coordinator had in depth knowledge of the people living in the service, for example, what jobs they had done, where they grew up, what was important to them and they knew what they liked to do with their time. The activity coordinator held regular resident meetings. The manager showed us evidence that actions had been taken because of feedback from people and relatives.

Staff supported people to engage in meaningful activities of their choice and staff told us the culture of the service was open with good teamwork.

There were multiple directional signs around the service which included words and pictures and signs on communal rooms such as bathrooms and toilets also had pictorial signs on them. There was a faith wall which contained information about multiple religions and cultures. A minister visited the service regularly. People had access to communal spaces, such as a dining room, a variety of lounges and a pub housed in a building outside. People’s rooms were highly personalised with their own furniture, pictures, ornaments, bed covers and cushions. Doors had people’s names on them as well as pictures that were personal to them. Activities were taking place in the garden room, and we saw people participating. Some people told us they didn’t like to join in the activities and that they were able to make that choice. There was an activity planner on the wall and people knew where to find information about the activities on offer.

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.