Archived: HF Trust Rendle House

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 changed to good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 70 (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 staff interacting with people with kindness and patience. When people became upset staff were understanding and empathetic in their responses. We saw one member of staff sitting quietly with someone and holding their hand to offer reassurance. We asked one person if they liked staff and they smiled and nodded. A relative commented; “The staff are very knowledgeable about the likes and dislikes of my loved one, they see my loved one as a person.”

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 were supported to take part in hobbies and interests of their choosing such as going for walks, visiting the local pub and shops and going out for meals. One person loved cats and had visited a cat café. Photographs clearly showed the pleasure they had got from this trip and staff were planning to take them again. Support plans reflected people’s social interests and staff were keen to ensure people lived a fulfilled life. A relative commented; “The staff team will arrange an activity [Name] has not done before, to see if they like it. If they do, it is added to their list of likes, if they don’t like the new activity, it is added to the list of dislikes.”

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.

Staff had worked with people and their relatives to identify goals and things they would like to do in the future. There was limited evidence to show how people had been involved in achieving their goals. For example, what skills they were developing or how they had taken part in planning and making choices.

However, people had choices and controlled their day to day lives. We heard one person asking to visit the local pub. They then changed their mind and said they wanted to visit the café for a cup of tea. On their return, the member of staff supporting the person told us they had decided they wanted to visit both places. A relative commented, “The staff team know [Name’s] needs, likes and dislikes. [Name] is out and about doing the things they like.”

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.

One person sometimes found it difficult and unsettling when unexpected visitors came to the service. To address this, arrangements had been made for any deliveries to be left securely at the gate, so delivery drivers did not need to come to the front door. When external professionals visited the service, staff asked them to supply a photograph in advance so they could prepare the person. The manager told us this had been successful and the person was much better able to cope with visitors as a result.

Staff were flexible when supporting people, adapting to any changes in their wishes about what they wanted to do. We observed staff were attuned to changes in people’s moods and were able to respond quickly when people became anxious or upset.

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

Staff were positive about the support they received from managers and the organisation. The deputy manager was a representative on the staff forum and was able to represent staff views. Staff told us they were encouraged to develop their own skills and had access to guidance if needed.