OSJCT Chestnut 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. The last time we rated this key question we rated it 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.

The provider had processes to ensure their workforce consisted of staff who shared the same values as the organisation. A manager talked about the provider’s recruitment process and said, “It’s values based, we will look at the individual first, will they fit the team, what do they bring that cannot be taught, such as caring, compassion and a genuine desire to support people.”

The provider had training arrangements to ensure all staff understood how to support and maintain people’s privacy and dignity when caring for them.

People’s relatives considered staff to be caring and compassionate towards their family members. One relative said, “Absolutely, they love her, and she loves them. The staff are very kind.” Another relative said, “Yes, I think so, they are respectful and polite towards her.”

People were positive about how staff interacted with them. One person said, “They are courteous, well-mannered and nothing is too much trouble, really helpful, I’ve found them really really good. I ask and they just do it going above and beyond.” Another person said, “I’m full of praise, the staff are attentive and kind.”

The interactions we observed between staff and people were supportive and compassionate and people looked relaxed. We observed staff investing time to reassure people and explain things to them. A relative said, “They are patient with her and understand her problems. They are very good with dealing with her.”

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.

The provider’s policies and practices promoted equality in care and supported people’s human rights when in care. People were not discriminated against, and diversity was celebrated. The provider’s staff training gave staff the knowledge they needed to deliver care in line with these policies and people’s protected characteristics.

Care plans showed that people’s age, sex, sexual orientation, disabilities, personal relationships, religion and spiritual beliefs were considered when planning people’s care. Care plans recorded people’s protective characteristics and needs so staff could better understand them as individuals. People’s religious and spiritual beliefs were recorded and, care plans also recorded when a person’s religious and spiritual beliefs had lapsed, so staff were aware of the person’s current preference.

Staff worked with people, their representatives and others who mattered to them, to learn more about people’s social and cultural background, what was important to them, their likes and dislikes, including their goals and wishes. A member of staff said, “Getting to know the resident is very important”. One person’s goal was to return home, and they told us how staff had worked with them, to build their confidence in readiness to return home.

Several people specifically told us they felt the staff knew them well. A person said, “They know me and if they don’t they take the time to find out”. Relatives also told us staff knew their family members well and treated them as individuals. A relative said, “They understand her and where she is coming from.” Another relative said, “They cater her care towards her needs.”

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

People’s independence was promoted. A person said, “They are flexible with what I want and let me have independence.” People were able to make independent plans with family and friends regarding visiting; there were no visiting restrictions.

Staff were employed to support people with social activities and there was a full programme. A person said, “There’s plenty to do, they [staff] wheel me to things.” Relatives comments included “They have lots of activities available and there is always something going on every day” and “There are activities available, but he chooses what he does and doesn’t take part in.”

Staff told us care staff were too busy to support people’s activities and some people told us they wanted staff to have more time to spend with them. A person gave an example of wanting to go through their photographs with staff and just chat. Managers present at this assessment were reviewing how activities were delivered and how staff interactions with people could be more meaningful.

Managers wanted people to be able to independently access activity material which provided a sense of fun, interest and mental stimulation. Items to support this had been purchased but had not always been accessible to people so this was being addressed. Managers also recognised the value of ‘butterfly moments’ (emotion focused connections that bring joy and a sense of belonging - from the Butterfly Approach) and more work was planned to support this approach.

Exercise-based activities were provided to help people maintain their health and independence. Equipment was sourced to help people walk independently and we observed staff supporting people to eat and drink independently.

People admitted for short-term stays were supported to retain the skills they needed to return to their own homes.

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.

People’s immediate needs were met by the staff to ensure they were safe. We observed staff recognising situations which required them to act immediately to prevent an accident. One person had attempted to stand without their walking aid and staff intervened to help them remain safe and to remind them to use their walking aid.

We observed staff taking immediate steps to avoid causing distress to an individual, in line with their agreed care plan.

Some people were cared for in their bedrooms and could not independently use a call bell. We observed care staff, including housekeeping staff checking on these people to ensure they were safe and settled. On the occasions we spoke with people in their bedrooms, we observed their call bells to be within reach.

The provider had arrangements for call bell response times to be monitored so any delays in staff initially responding to a call bell, to ensure people were safe, were addressed. A person told us they used their call bell at night when they had been poorly, and staff had responded and supported them.

Staff told us they knew people well, and recognised when people were in discomfort, distress or just generally not settled. People generally felt staff knew them well. In the case of 1 person, who could not verbally express themselves, staff told us they observed for changes in facial expression, demeanour and behaviour to help them identify any immediate needs.

Staff responded to people in pain and provided pain relief. Staff were dependent on the 111 service, for example, to respond to dental emergencies.

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

During the assessment we received mixed feedback from staff about how well staff wellbeing had been promoted and supported. Staff in various roles told us they had not always been supported, spoken to politely or valued. This was not the case for all staff, and some told us they had always felt supported and valued.

Managers present at this assessment recognised the importance of maintaining staff wellbeing and the impact staff support had on people’s care. A change in culture, review of staffing numbers and staff deployment, including changes in how decisions were made about admissions, were all actions being taken to support staff.

Most staff told us there was an open, inclusive and collaborative culture being promoted by the managers present during this assessment. A member of staff told us how things had changed for them, they said, “[Manager] comes and says good morning, they’re walking around, asking if I'm ok. It's nice, I am seen.”

Staff allocation arrangements enabled staff to take breaks in ‘staff only’ rest areas. Staff were supported to take their annual leave entitlement and staff shift patterns were reviewed. Reasonable adjustments were made to support staff where needed. A member of staff told us managers were flexible in how they completed their work which enabled them to work around their health needs.

The provider used a recognition and award scheme to recognise the achievements of staff.