Resident Wellbeing, Activity, and Social Inclusion Audit - Care Homes

Evidence to check

• • Staff can explain wellbeing and social inclusion in practical terms
• • Wellbeing, activity and social inclusion policy or strategy is current and accessible
• • Staff understand that activity is not limited to planned group sessions
• • Observed practice shows residents are supported with meaningful occupation and connection

Evidence to check

• • Admission assessments include interests, hobbies and social history
• • Care reviews update activity and wellbeing preferences
• • Residents' changing interests or abilities are recorded
• • Family or representatives contribute where the resident wants this or cannot provide full history

Evidence to check

• • Individual activity or wellbeing plans
• • Life history information used to shape activities
• • Plans include what the resident enjoys, dislikes and finds meaningful
• • Activities are adapted when the resident's needs or mood change

Evidence to check

• • Activity programme or schedule
• • Evidence of one-to-one activities for residents who do not join groups
• • Activities take place at different times, including evenings or weekends where appropriate
• • Residents are not left without meaningful engagement because they decline group activities

Evidence to check

• • Activity records show adaptations for individual needs
• • Use of accessible resources, sensory activities or supported participation
• • Residents with high dependency needs are included
• • Staff can explain how they adapt activities for specific residents

Evidence to check

• • Observation of staff-resident interaction outside formal activities
• • Residents are supported to chat, listen to music, help with tasks or spend time with others
• • Staff use everyday moments to reduce isolation
• • Care notes reflect informal engagement where relevant

Evidence to check

• • Activity participation records
• • Records include response, mood or enjoyment, not only attendance
• • Repeated refusal or lack of engagement triggers review
• • Future activity planning reflects what residents actually respond to

Evidence to check

• • Care plans identify important relationships and contacts
• • Records of support with visits, phone calls, letters, video calls or outings
• • Residents are helped to maintain relationships where they choose
• • Barriers to contact are identified and addressed

Evidence to check

• • Records of external involvement
• • Residents' feedback on entertainers or visitors
• • External activities are risk assessed where needed
• • Community links are meaningful rather than tokenistic

Evidence to check

• • Records of community outings
• • Risk assessments balance safety with choice and independence
• • Residents' preferences for community access are recorded
• • Residents who need support to go out are not routinely excluded

Evidence to check

• • Activity plans include cultural, religious and seasonal events
• • Resident preferences influence celebrations
• • Events are inclusive and respectful of different beliefs and backgrounds
• • Residents can choose whether and how to participate

Evidence to check

• • Use of tablets, video calls, music, films, digital reminiscence or online activities
• • Residents are supported to use technology safely and confidently
• • Technology is used based on preference, not as a replacement for human contact
• • Residents without family contact are considered for additional support

Evidence to check

• • Residents are offered choices rather than directed into activities
• • Refusals are respected and alternatives offered
• • Care notes or activity records show individual choice
• • Residents are not pressured to participate for the sake of activity records

Evidence to check

• • Training records for wellbeing, dementia care, communication or meaningful activity
• • Staff can describe how they support wellbeing during routine care
• • Supervision or team meetings discuss activity and emotional wellbeing
• • Care staff and activity staff work together rather than treating activities as separate

Evidence to check

• • Resident meeting minutes or activity planning records
• • Examples of resident-led activities
• • Residents' ideas are acted on where possible
• • Residents are supported to contribute according to ability and preference

Evidence to check

• • Care plans record spiritual or faith preferences
• • Support with prayer, services, faith visits, rituals or quiet reflection
• • Faith leaders or spiritual contacts involved where requested
• • Residents' beliefs are respected without assumptions

Evidence to check

• • Activity records include sensory, creative or therapeutic options
• • Resident preferences and responses are recorded
• • Risk assessments completed where pets, gardening or equipment are involved
• • Activities are chosen because they benefit residents, not just to fill the schedule

Evidence to check

• • Wellbeing or emotional support care plans
• • Care notes identify mood, distress, loneliness or anxiety
• • Referrals to GP, mental health services, counsellors or advocates where needed
• • Staff know how to support residents when they are low, distressed or withdrawn

Evidence to check

• • Care plans record personal routines and preferences
• • Observation of personal care interactions where appropriate
• • Residents have choice over clothing, grooming, bathing and routines
• • Daily care respects privacy, dignity and individuality

Evidence to check

• • Observation of quiet or low-stimulation spaces
• • Care plans identify residents who benefit from calm environments
• • Staff support residents to access quieter areas
• • Noise, crowding or overstimulation is considered when residents become distressed

Evidence to check

• • Records of garden or outdoor access
• • Outdoor areas are safe and accessible
• • Residents with mobility or cognitive needs are supported to go outside
• • Outdoor access is not limited only to warm weather or organised events

Evidence to check

• • Care plans identify meaningful everyday roles or tasks
• • Observation of residents being supported to contribute
• • Risk assessments support positive risk-taking
• • Residents are not discouraged from safe participation because it is inconvenient

Evidence to check

• • Family input recorded in wellbeing or activity plans
• • Families invited to contribute ideas, memories, music, photos or celebrations
• • Resident consent and preferences respected
• • Family participation improves personalised engagement

Evidence to check

• • Bedrooms show personalisation where the resident wishes
• • Care plans record identity, culture and personal expression
• • Residents are supported with clothing, appearance and routines that reflect who they are
• • Staff avoid institutional routines that remove individuality

Evidence to check

• • Resident and family feedback records
• • Surveys, meetings or informal feedback about activities
• • Complaints and compliments reviewed for wellbeing themes
• • Changes made in response to feedback

Evidence to check

• • Care notes record changes in mood or engagement
• • Staff escalate concerns about withdrawal or low mood
• • Care plans reviewed where wellbeing declines
• • Actions taken, such as one-to-one support, family contact, GP review or mental health referral

Evidence to check

• • Team meeting or handover records
• • Governance records include wellbeing and activity themes
• • Residents with poor engagement are discussed and reviewed
• • Actions from reviews are followed up

Evidence to check

• • Records of personal milestones and celebrations
• • Resident preferences for celebration or privacy are respected
• • Families or friends involved where appropriate
• • Celebrations are personalised rather than generic

Evidence to check

• • Activity resources are available and accessible
• • Resources match residents' age, culture, interests and abilities
• • Materials are refreshed or replaced when worn or unused
• • Residents can access resources independently where safe

Evidence to check

• • Wellbeing reviews show impact on mood, engagement or quality of life
• • Resident feedback confirms activities are meaningful
• • Residents at risk of isolation have targeted support plans
• • Governance reviews link activity provision to resident outcomes