Maesbrook 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 changed to requires improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

This service scored 50 (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, compassion and respect for their dignity. While some people and relatives described caring and supportive interactions, this was inconsistent and often depended on the individual staff member available. One person said “I dread the night-time because of the amount of agency staff. And especially when it is male staff. ”Their relative told us, “It is even on [person’s] care plan for them to have female staff.” This highlighted care was not always delivered in a way which protected dignity or emotional wellbeing. People described occasions when their care needs were not responded to promptly, leaving them uncomfortable and anxious. One person told us “I am sore. I like to be clean ”after waiting a long time to be supported with personal care, while another person told us they had repeatedly used their call bell but still had to wait for help to use the toilet. These delays caused distress and impacted people’s sense of dignity.

Most relatives described staff as “nice” ,“polite” and “very caring”. However, this was not everyone’s experience.One person reported feeling unsafe being washed by a male carer. There preference was to have female carers support them with personal care. They went on to tell us that they “Find it difficult at times with communication differences with staff”.

The provider always made efforts to treat people as individuals and involve them in decisions about their care, although there were some concerns. Many relatives said staff knew people well and tailored support around their preferences. One relative told us, “We are treated like a family within the home, they keep us informed and work with us ”while another said, “They treat each resident with respect as if they were family.”

Staff demonstrated an understanding of what mattered to people. For example, carers adapted shampoo after noticing a person’s hair condition had changed, showing attention to detail. One person with communication needs was supported using playfulness and closed questions to stay included, staff used flashcards and signing to aids to help their understanding.

Relatives consistently reported that staff showed respect for people’s individuality. Comments included, “All the carers are very nice to [person] quite nice people actually ”and “There is always someone popping in and out, they are very nice and my [person] smiles when they approach.”However, a small number of people raised concerns that some newer staff lacked the communication skills needed to support people with dementia effectively. While this was not widespread, it showed some inconsistency.

The provider did not always support people to maintain independence, exercise choice, or have control over their daily routines. Several people told us they could not choose when to receive personal care, with one person saying during our visit to the home, “I am still waiting to be washed, they like to do breakfast first, so I have to wait”. People also reported waiting long periods for help to use the toilet or to move, which limited their autonomy and caused distress. A resident told us, “I ring and ring the buzzer and still I have to wait.”

The environment did not consistently support independence. Lounge spaces were cluttered with mobility equipment, and storage issues created obstacles. Some residents described feeling anxious or reluctant to stay in communal areas, which further limited opportunities for independent activity and involvement. Relatives described staff as caring, but several noted that staffing pressures meant people were, “always waiting” or staff did not have the time needed to get to know people well enough to support full choice and control.

The provider did not always respond quickly enough to people’s immediate needs. People and relatives frequently described delays when using call bells or requesting assistance, with several reporting long waits for help to use the toilet or receive personal care. One person said ,“I need the loo and I ring and ring the buzzer and still I have to wait.” People also described feeling unsafe or anxious at night due to limited staff presence or noise in the corridors. One person said, “I don’t feel staff are always around, this worries me if I need help.” Some people praised staff responsiveness, particularly during daytime hours, but this was not consistent.

Environmental constraints such as low hot water availability and poor bathroom access meant staff were not always able to meet needs promptly. These delays and inconsistencies had a direct impact on people’s comfort, dignity and wellbeing ,indicating the provider needs to improve how it organises staffing and responds to urgent support needs.

The provider did not always support the workforce effectively, which contributed to inconsistent care and staff morale concerns. People and relatives repeatedly described staffing pressures. One person told us, “They never have enough time to spend with you”. A further person told us, “They are under such pressure that care and standards are slipping.”

People consistently told us the frequent use of agency staff affected continuity and confidence. One person said, “I dread the night-time because of the amount of agency staff” and another relative described a lack of compassionate leadership, saying, “If they had more supportive leadership staff would stay. ”Staff appeared committed and caring, but workflow issues, lack of clear organisation, and task confusion were observed. One carer was overheard saying, “What am I supposed to be doing?” during a busy period, indicating insufficient coordination.

Some staff were reassigned from domestic roles to care roles, which relatives said contributed to reduced cleanliness and increased pressure. Staff also reported challenges with communication and leadership, particularly relating to the registered manager’s approach.