Sutherlands 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained requires improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

This service scored 60 (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, empathy and compassion, or respect their privacy and dignity. During our inspection we saw staff were continuously not acknowledging people when they walked past them in the lounge and not responding to a person’s request for a prolonged period.

We discussed this with the manager who advised us that they were developing the staffs understanding of dignity and respect. We saw meeting minutes which evidenced that the leadership team had been developing the staff’s awareness of treating people with dignity and respect and practical ways to improve.

Despite these observations generally, relatives spoke positively of the staff being caring and respectful of their loved ones. A relative told us, “They give emotional and physical care. They treat [them] with dignity.”

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

For example, people had limited or no opportunity to access their community which did not align with some people’s preferences recorded in care plans we viewed.

However, we did see that people had been supported to personalise their rooms and staff knew what they liked including food preferences.

A relative told us, “They asked [person] and ourselves what he likes and doesn’t like, [person] told the staff himself and they responded.”

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

People’s care plans had information regarding people’s likes and dislikes, and how to support people in day-to-day life.

We observed staff promoting independence, encouraging people to access their home and to be part of activities.

A relative told us, “What [person] can do for themselves they don’t take away from [person]."

Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. We observed staff not always responding to people’s needs in a timely manner when they requested support or when they had pressed their call bell for assistance. However, we saw evidence that people were supported to access external health and medical services as and they required. Staff were aware of people’s health needs and knew how to respond to any emergencies to prevent people from becoming distressed or unwell.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. Staff told us that they felt supported by the leadership team. A staff member told us, “We are treated well and with respect.”