Harmony House

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

This assessment did not assess all quality statements within this key question and therefore, an overall rating has not been produced. We assessed 1 quality statement; equity in experience and outcomes. Overall, people's support and care was tailored to meet their needs and preferences. However, there were inconsistencies in the quality of person centred information in people's care records. Staff gave examples of where they had worked with external professionals such as speech and language therapists to better support a person with their cultural nutritional needs. People and their relatives told us the service recognised equality and diversity which supported positive outcomes for those people and they did not feel they were treated unfairly.

This service scored 11 (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.

People and relatives did not raise any concerns where they felt they had been subject to discrimination and inequality. However, people and relatives did not always feel involved or in control of the planning of their care and there was limited feedback to demonstrate people were encouraged and enabled to feedback about their care in ways that work for them. We have reported on this within the effective key question.

Staff spoke about people with compassion and knew what action to take if people raised any concerns about facing discrimination.

Systems were in place to prompt staff to consider any barriers people may experience in having their cultural needs safely met. Processes also considered if people were disadvantaged because of current health conditions. Staff worked with people's families and other health and social care professionals to ensure these barriers could be addressed. For example, 1 person was supported to safely eat culturally relevant food.

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.