Bethany House Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People benefitted from a kind, compassionate, and respectful staff team. Staff treated people with dignity and warmth. We observed positive interactions and staff demonstrated genuine care and attentiveness. People appeared at ease with staff and told us they felt cared for. One person told us, “I love it here, the care is great and I’m very safe. No concerns and I’ve got a lovely bedroom and en-suite and I’m happy with the home.” Another person told us, “The care is great and the home is immaculate. The staff always talk to me and the nurse checks on me.”

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People were supported to exercise choice and control over their daily activities, social interactions, and visitor arrangements. People were invited to decorate and furnish their bedrooms to their own taste and information was available to staff in people’s bedrooms about their preferences, likes and dislikes.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Staff supported people to do things for themselves where possible, to maintain people’s skills and independence, and people were empowered to take positive risks. For example, we noted that discussions had taken place, and risk assessments implemented, with some people who had requested specific access arrangements to their rooms.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Staff were attentive and knew people well and recognised signs of discomfort or distress. A relative told is, “The staff continually talk to us about [Name] care. The staff react positively to [their] health and the dedication to [them] has been exemplary, for instance they had to go to hospital after a fall and [staff] spent the whole night with [them] in hospital”.

The provider did not always care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff. They did not always support or enable staff to deliver person-centred care.

Not all staff received regular, documented support through supervision and appraisal, and some had not completed or refreshed essential training needed to deliver safe, effective, and person-centred care. These gaps could impact the consistency and quality of care provided. However, staff spoke very highly of the management team and described feeling supported in their roles. They attended regular staff meetings, which gave them opportunities to provide feedback, raise concerns, and suggest improvements to the service. The registered manager maintained an open-door policy and was readily accessible, fostering a culture of openness and collaboration.