Stoneacre Lodge Residential 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 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.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to person-centred care.

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.

Members of staff were individually kind and caring when they interacted with people, However, they were task focussed and care was not person-centred and, sometimes, people’s privacy and dignity was not always respected. When we spoke to people about whether members of staff were kind and caring, there was a mixed response. One person told us, “Several [members of staff] can be brusque, about half of them are not very kind.” Another person said, “Staff are kind, at least some of them are.” People told us members of staff did not always respect their privacy. One person told us, “Some [members of staff] knock [on my bedroom door] but quite a few don’t. It just depends.”

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. People did not have access to meaningful stimulation or activities. People had limited access to dementia friendly items or tactile objects to keep them engaged and stimulated. Care was not person-centred and when, because of maintenance issues, people had to move rooms, their personal belongings were not taken with them. There was mixed feedback from people about whether members of staff knew them and their personal likes or dislikes. One person told us, “[Members of staff] do talk to me but it’s not very often. They are so busy so they don’t know me that well.” A relative told us, “I think [members of staff] know what [family member] likes and doesn’t like. They definitely know what [family member] likes to eat.”

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. We observed people, who had capacity to make their own choices and decisions, were not given access to key coded doors so they could move freely about their own home. Members of staff made decisions for people about which lunch sitting they had their main meal and when baths and showers were planned for people.

The provider did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. People's immediate needs were not always responded to in a timely way. Call bells rang for long periods of time which indicated people did not receive support when they needed it. A member of the management team informed us the call bell system could not generate a report and no audits or review were carried out to check response times to call bells.

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. Members of staff were not always supported effectively by the management team and, as a consequence, they were not always able to support people with person-centred care. There was mixed feedback from members of staff about the support they received. Some members of staff told us more support from the management team could be provided, "I feel more support can be given." Other members of staff told us they were supported, "Yes, I feel my contributions are appreciated, and I’m supported in my role."