Pine Lodge 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 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.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to treating people with dignity and respect.

This service scored 40 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity as much as possible but were under time constraints due to staffing levels. For example, we saw a staff member rush away from a person who was trying to speak to them because they needed to ensure another person was safe. One partner told us, ‘There is also no real conversation observed, it is mostly the staff telling patients to sit down or go back to the lounge.’ One staff also told us, “It’s changed a lot, I hear staff saying ‘sit down’ to people. I feel upset”.

However, people were happy with the staff who supported them. People and their relatives told us, “The staff are nice to me”, “Everyone is lovely, the chefs are lovely, there’s a lack of staff, but they do a great job.” And “I couldn't expect anything more, there is care and love in the relationship”.

Staff treated people as individuals but did not always have time to make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. Staff had told us they did not always have time to sit and speak to people to get to know them well but when they had the time they did so. Staff were rushed at times and told people to wait for support. For example, one person told staff they were concerned they had had a relapse of a health condition and needed staff to help them. Staff told the person they needed to wait until there was enough staff to support them with their worry. Later the person left the lounge and still had not been supported with their concern.

People’s equality needs, such as religious, sexuality and cultural needs, were assessed to enable staff to understand where people needed support. Staff supported people to access religious services if they wished to do so.

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.

People had access to a drink station where they could get their own cold drinks. There was a small kitchen area in the dining room. However, staff told the inspector this was for the use of staff and people were not supported to use this to make hot drinks or snacks. Staff had not considered how this space could be used to give people more control over day to day areas such as how their tea was made.

People were offered day to day choices such as where and what they wanted to eat and what they wanted to wear. However, some people told us they had to wait for meals.

Staff did not always have time to respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. We observed that 1 person was upset during our inspection. Staff started to comfort them. However, they then needed to leave the person and support someone else who was at high risk of falling. There were no other staff in the lounge to provide support, and the staff member did not have any other way or asking another staff member to help. The person who was upset was left to comfort themselves without staff support.

Staff were not always supported and enabled staff to deliver person-centred care. Staff told us they felt rushed at times, in particular in the morning and at mealtimes. One staff said, “I go home upset.”

Staff told us that despite this they still felt supported and appreciated but some staff said they would feel more valued if there were more staff. They had access to information to support them if they wanted to raise concerns such as how to raise a whistleblowing Staff told us they felt the manager was approachable if they needed support. There was an open-door policy at the service so staff could speak to the manager if they wanted to do so. Staff were supported though regular supervisions and handovers.