Royal Garden Hotel

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 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 and their relatives described staff as kind, caring and attentive. One relative told us, "They are very kind to the extent that when they are going off shift, they hug [person] and tell them when they will be back in to look after [person]. We have most definitely made to feel like part of the family." A person said, “The staff are super, they help with medication and can help with laundry as well.” People were treated with dignity and respect, with people and their relatives telling us staff always knocked before entering bedrooms and ensured privacy was maintained during personal care. People told us everyone’s privacy was respected, one said, “Staff are so willing, what I like is they don't chat about other residents, as much as we try to find out things.”

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 and their relatives described how staff took time to understand what mattered to people and adapted support accordingly. One relative said, “I like the fact that they actually take time to talk to [person]. The staff talk to everyone; I have seen that when I visit. Just recently one of the staff got a puppy. [Person] had the same breed of dog years ago, so the staff took the dog in the home for [person] to see. Little things like that make all the difference.” People's preferences regarding personal care were understood and respected. For example, a relative told us their family member preferred support with bathing from a particular staff member and their choice was consistently respected. Staff knew people well and told us of routines and specific wishes people had.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. The ethos of the service was to promote independence, ensuring people maintained full control over their daily lives. A person said, "They help me with a bath and a hair wash, they don't need to help me as much anymore because I've got a bit better and I do a bit more for myself now. They ask me how they can help and do as I ask, but I do an awful lot myself now." Care records and our observations demonstrated people’s independence was promoted through personalised approaches, including the use of assistive technology and communication aids where required. Staff gave examples of how they promoted independence by offering support if people were struggling. People were enabled to continue hobbies, interests and relationships that were important to them, this included practising their faith. The registered manager told us the service had in-house religious services; however, people went out to their own chosen place to worship.

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 told us staff responded promptly when support was required including staff quickly attending when call bells were used. A person commented, “I once rang the staff, and they came to help me (explained the reason why). The girls came rushing up and they helped me with that.” A relative explained staff had moved their family member closer to staff offices because they frequently called out. We reviewed daily records where staff spent time with people if they displayed any anxieties. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people's individual needs and took action to provide comfort and support during periods of distress, illness or bereavement. During the assessment we found that although staff responded appropriately to people's immediate needs, the service could not always meet some people's increasing health needs when these progressed beyond the scope of the service. The registered manager recognised these limitations and worked with people, relatives and professionals to ensure alternative arrangements were made when required.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. People and their relatives described a stable workforce with a low staff turnover. A relative told us, "Many of the staff have been there for a long time, so they obviously enjoy working there." The registered and deputy manager supported staff with ongoing training and mentoring, which helped staff provide person-centred care. A staff member said, “I go into the office every so often and we talk about issues and problems, I am happy with how they do this. I do feel cared for by them.” Workforce wellbeing and inclusion were promoted; we were provided examples of where the management team had supported staff with professional and personal challenges.