Holme Lea

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

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 75 (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 consistently treated people with kindness, empathy, and compassion, and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff also treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect. Most people and their families spoke positively about the staff team. One relative told us: “I have never seen a bad carer there. They are always thoughtful and lovely. They are very supportive and kind.” However, one relative raised concerns about the empathy shown by some staff.

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. Staff clearly knew people well and understood their preferences and wishes. However, care plans did not always reflect the level of personalised detail needed to guide new staff.

The provider promoted people’s independence, ensuring they knew their rights and had choice and control over their care, treatment, and wellbeing. Although care plans did not always include enough detail about what people could do for themselves, we observed that people were supported to remain as independent as possible throughout our visit. People were encouraged to make choices, including what they wanted at mealtimes, and were able to make visual choices from the menu. Requests for alternatives were provided where possible.

Families generally told us that people had choices in daily life. One relative commented: “[Family member] keeps in touch with some of their old friends in the community and they visit them.” However, one relative raised a concern that where people had a preference, such as wishing to be supported by female carers, this was not always respected.

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

We observed staff being very responsive. For example, one person made a specific request for breakfast, which was quickly provided by kitchen staff. Feedback from people and families raised some concerns about staff availability, as staff were not always visible across the home. However, we generally observed staff responding quickly to requests for help. The registered manager carried out call bell response checks during walkarounds. Although these checks were not usually at the busiest times of day, call bells were responded to promptly.

The provider cared about and promoted staff wellbeing, supporting and enabling them to deliver person-centred care. Processes were in place to help staff access counselling, and the registered manager told us they focused on ensuring staff had the support they needed. Awards were also in place to recognise staff achievements and those who had gone above and beyond.