London Care (Lew Evans House) Also known as SE22 0QF

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

Records showed the provider liaised with the local authority prior to taking on packages of care to assess whether the service could support people with their needs. People‘s needs were considered as part of their support plan including their rights to equality in respect of their culture, religion, ethnicity, disability and sexuality. Information could be provided about the service in different languages or formats such as large print. Some improvements were needed to ensure people’s individual needs for sociability and stimulation were consistently met. The provider was working to improve the range of activities available following feedback from people using the service and the local authority.

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.

People told us they felt staff knew them and their individual preferences and needs well. People were supported to maintain links in the community where this was part of the plan for their care. Most people told us they were happy with their care and support. Two people expressed a wish for more activities to be available at the service. One person commented, “They take me to my club on a Monday and they take me to my singing club on a Friday and if it's a nice day we will go out and just have a drink or sit in the park.”

Staff told us they understood people’s need and preferences about their care. They confirmed they completed equality and diversity training and respected each person as an individual. For example they explained how people were supported to attend a place of worship or with food that reflected their culture and choices. They said they tried to encourage people to take part in the activities as much as possible.

The provider assessed people’s needs and took into account their personal preferences. Staff and registered managers were familiar with these, and they were recorded in people’s care records. A monitoring visit by the local authority in January and February 2024 contained some positive feedback and stated, “The staff, including the housing officer based at the service, are passionate about their work and the well-being of the service users. The interaction between staff and service users was observed to be positive.” It also highlighted the need for consideration of activities to meet people’s needs for companionship reduce isolation. They reported no other concerns in the way people’s support plans addressed their needs We found some further improvements needed to ensure people’s needs for sociability were addressed. The branch manager had a plan to address this and they were working to improve the range and quality of activities offered. Some regular activities were now being organised including singing, yoga and chess. The branch manager actively sought people’s views about their support and had an open door surgery session where people were encouraged to bring any issues and give feedback. The provider gathered people’s views about the service through surveys and acted on the information they received.

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.