Archived: Blossoms Care Home Limited

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 changed to requires improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect. Although we observed some kind and caring interactions between staff and people, we also observed people not always being spoken to or treated in a dignified way. People were not encouraged to take as much control over their lives as possible and their immediate needs were not always responded to well which at times made some people react in a distressed way.

This service scored 45 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People were not always treated with kindness, empathy and compassion. Staff did not always respect their privacy and dignity. Although we observed some kind interactions between staff and people, we also observed staff talking to and about people in an undignified way. For example, a staff member referred to people as ‘at the end of their life’ in front of them while they were in their room. We observed a staff member trying to get a reaction from a person by saying certain words which made the person become distressed.

Another staff member was referring to people by nicknames, there was no information in people’s care plans to say this was their preference. We reported this back to the manager who said the language some staff used towards people had been identified as being inappropriate previously.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

The provider did not promote people’s independence, so people did not know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. The provider did not treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. The provider did not take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics. There was no information in people’s care plans about their life histories, personal goals or any aspirations. The manager said, “Life history is missing in peoples plans at the moment, the details.”

A relative told us their loved one loved music and described other important aspects about their life history. They told us their loved one had many subjects of interests and liked to engage about them. They said, “Activities don’t know what they do here, I would be very happy for them to be engaged more.” There was nothing in the person’s care plan which reflected what their relative had told us so staff had no information to refer to which would meet the person’s individual needs or preferences.

The provider did not always listen to or understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. Some people could not communicate with staff due to language or other barriers. One person became distressed and anxious when they were unable to express their needs to staff and be understood. Their communication risk assessment contained generic and incorrect information. It referred to certain equipment that was no longer being used to help the person communicate. There was no communication passport or description of the signs staff should look out for to support the person to express themselves. Staff had received no specific training to help them communicate with this person. Another person’s first language was not English, and staff struggled to communicate with them.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.