Hazelmead Residential Care 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 outstanding. This meant people were truly respected and valued as individuals; and empowered as partners in their care in an exceptional service.

This service scored 90 (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 was exceptional at treating people with kindness, empathy and compassion and in how they respected people’s privacy and dignity. Staff always treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Relatives spoke about the outstanding care provided over many years, highlighting that staff understood people’s needs and responded promptly. They told us the home was well managed, and staff were approachable and consistent.

People consistently told us they were treated with kindness, compassion and dignity in their day-to-day care. They said staff listened to them and communicated in ways they understood. One person told us, “If it hadn’t been for [the registered manager] I wouldn’t have stayed here, she’s brilliant.” A relative said, “Staff are caring and kind. They do a perfect job… It’s a well-run service and I would score it 10 out of 10.”

Health and social care professionals were equally positive. One said, “I saw lovely interactions between staff and residents – professional, clear, respectful and warm, with consideration of when privacy needed to be facilitated.” Another described “strong therapeutic relationships” and how they had witnessed “positive, sensitive and friendly interactions.” While another professional said, “The interactions between staff and residents are wonderful… we absolutely believe the care to be compassionate and warm… residents are well respected when it comes to their privacy and dignity.”

Our observations confirmed this. People were supported to eat with dignity, whether they needed assistance or adapted utensils. Staff noticed when people were struggling and offered discreet, practical help. We saw staff giving full attention to a person with a speech impediment, patiently listening and ensuring they were heard.

There was a clear culture of kindness and respect throughout the service and among visiting professionals. People’s privacy was upheld, and information was treated confidentially. Staff demonstrated deep knowledge of individuals’ preferences, histories and potential, and used this to tailor care and communication.

The provider treated people as individuals and was exceptional in how they made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. The provider took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People’s individual needs and preferences were understood and consistently reflected in their care and support. Relatives told us staff knew people extremely well, including their likes, dislikes and communication needs. One relative said, “[Person] is deaf, but the staff know their likes and dislikes. I am involved in their care plan. They consult me… The next best thing to home and I would not want them to move.” Another relative commented, “[Person] has never complained about anything, and I have never needed to complain. They tell us if [Person] needs anything and we don’t have any concerns. [Person] is well looked after. I would definitely recommend this service.”

Professionals confirmed this approach. A speech and language therapist said, “Staff were very clear about how the non-verbal person I was involved with could have control and choice within their mealtime support. I saw evidence of [staff] looking out for and acting on non-verbal cues and being led by the person.” They also noted staff took pride in building strong relationships and advocating for people’s preferences.

Healthcare professionals told us “There is clear evidence of person-centred care with my client. [Person’s] weekly activities are tailored to their interests.” They also said, “My client was due for an MRI scan as part of dementia screening process. This we thought was something [person] simply would not tolerate. It was only the strength of the therapeutic relationship they had with the supporting staff member that [person] attended. The staff member stayed close by during the entire scan and communicated with them, offering the right reassurances at the right time. The client successfully completed the MRI scan and was later given the all clear. This could not have been done without this support.”

Our observations showed staff actively promoting choice and inclusion. When a person expressed interest in attending a firework display, staff explored options and adapted plans so everyone could participate, including those unable to attend in person. People’s diverse needs were met, for example by providing chunky crayons for a person unable to use standard pencils. Records demonstrated regular meetings where people shaped menus, activities and events, such as planning Halloween celebrations and trips to local places. Staff acted promptly on these preferences, ensuring people’s voices were central to decision-making.

This evidence showed an embedded culture of person-centred care, where staff understood and respected individuality, adapting support to meet communication needs, and working collaboratively with families and professionals to achieve positive outcomes.

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

People were consistently supported to have choice and control over their care and daily lives. Relatives told us staff promoted independence and respected decisions. One relative said, “[Person] can choose what they want to do and to eat daily and they are very encouraging towards them if they feel [person] hasn't made a wise choice… I really can't say anything negative at all. We would all be lost without them.”

Relatives described being fully involved in care planning and decision-making. They told us staff kept them informed about appointments, medication changes and best interest decisions. One said, “[Staff] inform me of any medication changes or errors and any best interest decisions I am always consulted… [Person] has an annual care plan review, and I feel involved.”

Professionals confirmed people were supported to make choices and maintain independence. One professional said, “The client has much opportunity to engage in meaningful activity but is also equally supported if they decline to attend. I feel like there is a good balance in the home between encouraging engagement but also allowing for choice.”

Our observations showed staff prioritised people’s preferences in everyday interactions. When someone interrupted the registered manager in the middle of something and asked for a Yorkshire pudding with their stew, the manager stopped what they were doing to have a warm conversation about their favourite food, and made sure their choice was included. This demonstrated people were put first, even during busy times.

Records showed regular meetings where people shaped decisions about their environment and activities. For example, during menu planning, each person chose a meal for the week from a large recipe folder. Residents voted on lounge paint colours after trying tester pots, and planned outings such as a trip to a local book shop and a birthday lunch at a local pub. Staff acted quickly on people’s preferences, making sure their voices were central to all decisions.

People had access to friends, family and the local community, and were supported to maintain relationships and networks that mattered to them. There was clear evidence of a culture that valued independence, respected rights and promoted wellbeing through choice and control.

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.

Staff were acutely aware of how people communicated their needs, especially where people could not express pain or distress verbally. We observed staff responding to people’s needs swiftly and appropriately.

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

Staff gave positive feedback about the support they received from the management team. A staff member said, “[The registered manager] is an amazing manager and always puts everyone first before herself, anything you feel is needed she will try her best to get.”