Aldringham Court

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 inspection we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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.

People told us they felt the staff were caring. A person said, “[Staff] are all very kind.”

We saw staff interacted with people in a kind and respectful manner. Staff knocked on bedroom doors before entering and ensured doors were closed when people were being supported with their personal care needs. Staff offered support to people in a discreet way, to ensure their dignity was respected.

A relative told us how their family member’s dignity was being maintained with the way the laundry was managed. They said the laundry service was, “Marvellous, [family member] is never wearing anyone else’s clothes, and nothing is lost."

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’s care records included their diverse needs and their preferences about how they wanted to be cared for, including their likes and dislikes. The records identified how people preferred to be addressed and we saw this being respected during our inspection visits. The registered manager told us, if people required a specific gender of staff to support them with their personal care needs, this was respected

People told us their decisions were respected, such as when they went to bed, got up in the morning and received personal care. People told us they chose when they wanted a bath or shower and staff respected their choices. A person told us about how a staff member supported them, “Beautifully,” when they had a shower. However, 2 people told us staff did not always support them to wash in the way they preferred. This was discussed with the registered manager and regional manager who confirmed people’s preferences in relation to personal care would be checked and they would ensure staff followed their wishes.

The registered manager told us how people’s spiritual needs were considered and regular visits from local Christian and Catholic places of worship happened.

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

People told us the staff listened to what they said, in relation to how they wanted to be cared for and supported. Care plans showed people were consulted about their care needs. A staff member said, “We encourage people to express their views, involve them in decision-making, and record their choices in their care plans so these are consistently followed. This helps promote dignity, independence, and person-centred care.”

People’s records included information of the areas of their care they could attend to independently and where they needed the support of staff. We saw staff encouraged people’s independence and used equipment to maintain their independence, such as to eat and drink and mobilise, where required.

People chose what they wanted to do, such as if they participated in group activities and what they wanted to eat and drink. People were supported to make choices about their food, including the use of show plates, and accessible menu. If people did not want what was on the choice of menu, they were offered an alternative. We observed where people were provided with an alternative to the menu. The chef told us how they spoke with people regarding their choices of menu and their views were listened to and used when planning.

People attended meetings where they discussed the service, included activities. A ‘you said we did’ board, identified actions were being taken to have trips out in the community. People told us this was happening.

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.

Staff were attentive to people’s needs and responded to any verbal and non verbal requests for assistance. This included call bells and the use of sensor mats which were used to alert staff if the person who required support was mobilising independently due to their risk of falls.

Call bell response times were being monitored to ensure people’s calls for assistance were responded to promptly. People told us they felt staff were available when they needed them. A person said when they used the call bell, “[Staff] come quick enough.”

Staff responded to provide appropriate support if a person changed their mind, for example, if they preferred a different meal option staff ensure this was provided.

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

Staff received training to meet the needs of people using the service, as well as staff meetings and 1 to 1 supervision meetings. Supervisions gave staff the opportunity to receive feedback, discuss any concerns and identify any further training needs.

Staff received breaks and were provided with a staff room which they could use.

Staff had access to an employee assist programme should they require advice or support.