Archived: Greenview Residential 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 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 staff were caring, patient, knew them well and they enjoyed living at the service. Staff ensured people’s privacy and dignity were respected, for example by knocking on the door to their room and waiting to be invited in before entering. A professional partner to the service told us the staff were a caring and compassionate team.

Relatives told us they were always welcomed into the service, and it has a homely atmosphere, which people liked.

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 told us staff respected their choices and relatives told us people were able to bring in their own furniture from home if they wished, to personalise their rooms. People’s rooms were individualised with their own pictures and personal mementos.

We observed staff speaking with people about their interests and personal histories, which people enjoyed. People’s care plans provided staff with the information they needed to support people in line with their personal cultural, social and religious needs and wishes.

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 they had choice and control over their lives whilst at the service. For example, they told us they had choice and control over their day-to-day decisions, such as the clothes they wore, and they could access the garden when they wanted to.

People had access to, and enjoyed, activities within the service and the gardens, they also had opportunities to access the community with staff, and a hairdresser visited the service regularly. People told us although they enjoyed the activities, they did not always know what activities were planned. However, when we shared this with the registered manager, they took immediate action and put a board up with the day’s activities on.

People were supported to maintain relationships with friends and families and there were no restrictions on people having visitors.

People’s care plans contained details about people’s day-to-day needs and preferences. For example, 1 person’s care plan identified household tasks they liked to help the staff with.

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 knew them well, and they recognised and anticipated their needs swiftly. We observed staff quickly responding to people, for example, 1 staff member identified a person who needed help with their posture and offered them a cushion for support.

People had access to call bells, and we observed these, and people’s verbal requests, were responded to by staff without delay throughout the inspection.

Staff understood people’s non-verbal cues. For example, when 1 person was showing initial signs of anxiety, staff provided an alternative activity for them, this helped to effectively reduce their anxiety.

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

There was a consistent, well established staff team who told us they enjoyed working at the service and they felt well supported by the registered manager and the provider.

Staff told us they felt listened to, respected, and they could share ideas to improve the service. Although records showed, and the registered manager told us, there had not been a staff meeting for 7 months, there were, however, other opportunities for staff to provide feedback and share ideas, such as a staff survey.

Staff told us they received supervision. Although the frequency of these was not specified in the supervision policy, staff told us they felt they could speak to the registered manager and provider at any time outside of formal supervision.

The provider told us they had a programme in place where they provided health and social care students with the chance to gain work experience at the service. The aim was to provide them with an opportunity to establish understanding of care and to add practical experience to their learning and help develop their careers.