Gracefield Health Care Limited (GHC) - 31 St Domingo Grove

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 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 consistently treated people with kindness, empathy, and compassion, while respecting their privacy and dignity. Staff also treated colleagues from other organisations with the same level of kindness and respect.

We observed staff interacting with people in a warm, compassionate manner. All staff we spoke with, including the registered manager, demonstrated a strong understanding of peoples’ needs, not only in relation to their time at Gracefield Healthcare Ltd but also their life history prior to moving in. This information was clearly captured within care plans.

Staff respected people’s wishes and preferences, and their practice was guided by what mattered to people rather than by task-based routines, demonstrating genuinely person-centred care.

Feedback from visiting professionals was positive. They spoke highly of the staff at the service, with one professional sharing, “The staff are professional and engaging with us whilst dealing with ongoing issues regarding patient management."

The provider treated people as individuals and ensured their care, support, and treatment met their needs and preferences. Staff took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture, unique backgrounds, and protected characteristics.

Where people had interests, staff supported them to continue these. People were able to access the community either independently or with support from staff. Where there was a known risk to people accessing the community without support, risk assessments and protocols were in place to ensure their independence was encouraged while still maintaining safety.

One person told us, “I get to go out. I like going out for food, like to sing, I get help with cooking if I need it.”

Relatives were able to visit when they wished, and staff supported people to maintain contact with their relatives. Communication aids were used when people could not communicate verbally, helping to promote and maintain their independence.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. People were encouraged to maintain their independence wherever possible. For example, staff supported people to prepare meals rather than completing the task for them. People were encouraged to do their own washing, one person told us, “I like to do my own washing, staff show me how to work washing machine.”

People were also supported to take part in shopping for the service, enabling them to retain and develop their independence. One person told us, “I can buy my own cakes/sweets and chocolates."

People were supported by staff who listened to and understood their needs, views and wishes. Staff responded promptly and appropriately to people’s needs and took action to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Relatives told us they were kept well informed about their relatives’ needs. They said that any changes in health or wellbeing were communicated to them immediately. During the assessment, we observed staff attending to people in a timely manner and following each person’s lead. For example, when one person began to show signs of distress, staff provided immediate reassurance and implemented appropriate distraction techniques to support the person effectively.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled them to consistently deliver person-centred care. Staff we spoke with told us they were happy with the support they received. One staff member said the manager had been accommodating when, for personal reasons, they needed changes to their shift.

Staff received supervision; however, we identified that some staff members had outstanding supervision sessions. Dates had already been scheduled to ensure these were completed. Despite some supervision being overdue, staff told us they spoke with the manager regularly, and there was evidence of frequent team meetings and opportunities for staff to provide feedback, raise concerns, and contribute to ongoing improvements.