Lydia Rose Care

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. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated 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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People consistently told us staff were kind, patient and respectful in the way care was delivered. People said staff took time with them and explained what they were doing, helping them feel involved and reassured. One person described staff as “absolutely amazing,” explaining staff stayed with them when they felt anxious and provided reassurance until they felt settled.

People described feeling comfortable and at ease during personal care. One person told us, “They [staff] never hurry me, nothing is too much trouble,” which helped them feel respected, relaxed and dignified.

Families spoke warmly about the compassion shown by staff, particularly at times when people were unwell, anxious or unsettled. One family member told us they were “so glad we found them,” and said staff showed genuine care, patience and understanding during difficult periods. Families said this compassionate approach made a significant difference to their loved one’s wellbeing and to their own confidence in the service.

Staff told us they aimed to deliver care with kindness, dignity and respect always, and this was clearly reflected in people’s experiences. Care was delivered in a way that protected people’s privacy, upheld their dignity and supported strong, trusting relationships.

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.

People and families consistently told us staff knew people well and adapted care around individual needs rather than delivering care in a standard way. For example, staff adjusted how and when care was provided to reflect people’s preferences and routines. Care was described as personal and thoughtful, with staff taking time to understand people’s routines, preferences and communication needs. One family member told us, “They really know [my relative] and what works best for them.”

People said staff took time to explain what they were doing and changed their approach to suit them. One person told us staff “talk to me all the time and explain what they’re doing,” which helped them feel involved, respected and reassured. Another person told us staff were “very patient and take things at my pace.”

Families highlighted the importance of having regular carers who understood the person well, explaining this helped reduce anxiety and build trust. One family member told us, “Having familiar faces makes such a difference.” Staff feedback reflected this approach, with staff describing how they adjusted their communication style, pace and level of support depending on the person they were supporting.

Care was delivered in a way that reflected people’s personalities, preferences and emotional needs, rather than following a task‑focused routine. This helped people feel comfortable, respected and supported as individuals.

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 staff supported them to remain as independent as possible and encouraged choice in their day‑to‑day care. Families described staff offering choices in a calm and respectful way and supporting decision‑making even when it took more time.

One person told us staff “always ask if that’s what I want, they never presume” helping ensure care was led by the person. Staff feedback reflected this approach, with staff describing how they encouraged independence and respected people’s preferences.

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 and families told us staff responded quickly and compassionately when people needed support. Families described staff recognising when people were unsettled or confused and taking prompt action to reassure them.

Families gave examples of staff responding outside of planned visits when this was needed, including attending out of hours and staying beyond scheduled times to make sure people were safe and comfortable. One family member described the service as “unbelievable” and said staff came out “no problem at all” when support was needed urgently.

This showed staff were committed to responding to people’s immediate needs in a kind, flexible and person‑centred way, rather than focusing solely on tasks or timings.

The provider supported and promoted the wellbeing of their workforce and enabled staff to deliver consistently good, person‑centred care. Staff told us they felt supported and valued in their roles and said supervision provided space to reflect on their wellbeing as well as their development. The registered manager told us staff were encouraged to “talk openly about how things are going and what support might be needed.”

Leaders told us staff were supported to develop at their own pace, recognising that learning and confidence‑building is “different for everyone”. Staff described feeling encouraged rather than pressured, which helped them build skills steadily and feel confident in their roles.

Supervision records showed staff were supported to work towards qualifications such as NVQs, and that learning and development needs were discussed, planned and reviewed on an individual basis. Records also showed staff were offered opportunities to shadow office‑based work, helping them develop an understanding of how care was planned and coordinated across the service.

The provider also recognised wider pressures on staff, including the cost of living, and had introduced initiatives such as fuel bonuses to provide practical support. This emphasis on workforce wellbeing and enablement was reflected in feedback from people and families, who described care that was kind, patient and consistent, delivered by staff who clearly felt supported.