Windy Ridge 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 outstanding. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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.

We observed positive staff interactions with people living at the home. Staff were kind, considerate and responsive. A health care professional said, “Staff are very caring, and the service is good at retaining staff. Very friendly, always make me feel very welcome."

People’s relatives we spoke with were all were complimentary about their relatives’ care. A family member told us how staff had supported their relative following a bereavement. They said, “At first, he stayed in his room, and he didn’t want to come downstairs. The staff have been lovely. They are excellent. They encouraged dad to come downstairs and join in. He’s doing really well.” Another person’s relative said “The staff are absolutely superb. They help people to participate and are very encouraging.” They also commented “No matter what time we come in, he always looks smart.”

There were spaces in the home and gardens that people could utilise for visiting. At the time of the inspection, the provider was building a bar and activities area in the grounds of the home, which would also increase accommodation for visitors.

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.

While it was not always clear in people’s care plans how relatives were involved, feedback from relatives and staff confirmed their involvement. A relative told us, “He really likes it here. It reminds me of a home from home. He’s treated as an individual. When he arrived, he was given a welcome card. The staff seem to really know my dad. They listen.”

Staff told us how they involved people’s relatives in gathering life and medical histories. A form was used to record information about people’s personal, cultural, social and religious needs. This was used to tailor people’s individual care and support needs. The registered manager told us about regular meetings they had with relatives to give general updates on the home and activities. A poster in the lounge area showed dates of these meetings.

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

Care plans reflected that people were empowered to have their say about things that were important to them and were listened too and what they said was acted on. Staff told us how they promoted people’s independence, choice and control during, for example, personal care and at mealtimes. Also, supporting people to access the garden or shops. One person attended a weekly dance class at the local arts centre.

A person told us they liked to walk after lunch. Later we observed that when this person got up from their seat, a member of staff opened the patio door for them. The person did a short walk around the garden and then sat on one of the benches, where they were joined briefly by a member of staff who sat with them and chatted.

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.

Where people could not communicate verbally, we observed interactions between staff and people that demonstrated relationships were caring and compassionate. For example, a person was sitting in a corner of the lounge. They would say occasional words very quietly but did not converse. A member of staff sat down in a chair next to them and chatted. A few moments later he left and returned with a cardigan for her. He put this on for her, explaining what he was doing and giving simple instructions.

Staff told us how they supported people who could not communicate verbally. For example, using facial clues, verbal cues and gestures. Staff said they also used pictures, and some people could be given a pen and paper to express their needs and wishes. People had detailed communication care plans and staff we spoke with were aware of these.

We observed staff responded swiftly to call bells or people calling out for help. Staff told us this was monitored by the management and said managers also responded if they heard the bell.

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

Staff we spoke with said they felt valued and were treated well by the provider. They told us the provider recognised staff talents, skills and capabilities and encouraged them to progress to other roles. They said the company provided a competitive salary, further training, and that the workload was manageable. Staff told us there was a ‘staff of the year’ award and staff parties were held to celebrate doing a good job. They said they felt listened to and could raise any concerns if they felt they or others were not being treated well.The registered manager showed us records and photographs of staff team building events.