Foxleigh Grove Nursing 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 65 (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 did not always treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion, or respect their privacy and dignity.

Staff did not always knock on people’s doors when entering their bedrooms. This did not ensure people’s privacy and dignity was always respected.One person told us they did not always feel staff spoke to them with kindness. One person said, “I am not happy here. I don’t feel safe. One or two of them [carers] talk to me in a threatening way but they don’t realize it. They only know half of me so far although they are trying to. I don’t love them all, most of them are nice but one or two are not polite.” We informed the provider about this person’s experience and they advised they would look into this.

Some people’s rooms were located opening into a communal lounge area. We found people’s bedroom and bathroom doors were open, and this was visible from the communal area. We observed people’s privacy and dignity was not always upheld as a result of this. We fed this information back to the provider who took action to address it. We observed most of the staff appeared to naturally reassure people, when appropriate, by putting a supportive hand on someone’s arm or shoulder.
 

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences.

There was an activities team within the service. The provider told us on the weekends there was a pianist for a group singalong, with relatives, residents and staff. However, some people did not leave their rooms did not experience as much interaction and activities as those who spent time in communal spaces. This meant people could be at risk of social isolation and a lack of regular meaningful engagement to support their wellbeing.

Some people told us how they were supported in line with their individual needs. One person said, “I need a room with a hoist facility, which I get here- I still work so I need some privacy and that works well for me here, if I stay in my room.”
 

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

People told us they were supported by staff according to their individual needs. For example, one person said, “I prefer to rise later anyway. It can be as late as 10.30 sometimes but I don’t mind if it is.” Another person said, “In the mornings I normally wake up naturally, but [staff] would come with a cup of tea and then I am assisted to get up and dress. I am always asked if I want to have a wash and a shave.”

The service had vehicles which could be used to transport people to local activities and days out. We reviewed care plans and found for some people, where their care plan included their hobbies such as gardening, there was evidence of this taking place in daily notes.
 

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

People told us they felt staff responded quickly to their needs. One person said, “I do use the call bells, but I don’t really have to wait, never more than five minutes.” We reviewed call bell audits and found 95% of calls were responded to within the provider target time of 5 minutes.People and relatives raised no concerns regarding staffing levels with us and shared they were happy with the support they received. The home worked closely with a range of health and social care professionals to support people’s health needs.
 

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to deliver person-centred care.

Although we received some feedback that break times were not always split evenly, however, staff felt supported and enjoyed working at the home. One staff member said, “The management is quite good” and “Sometimes I feel like we are in a home, not at work.” Staff told us they felt able to raise concerns with the appropriate partnership agencies if required and escalate any tasks to maintenance and kitchen staff when needed.