HF Trust - Lympne Place (High Trees and The Beeches)

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 70 (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.

Relatives and external professionals told us that staff treated people with kindness and respect. One relative said, “They are treated with dignity and respect even when they might not be nice or verbally abuse staff. The attitude of staff stuns me. They are so calm. An external professional told us, “I find the staff very caring and responsive when I visit. I have witnessed how attentive they are when caring for their residents”.

Staff described people in a positive way, focusing on their individual characteristics. Staff encouraged people to express their views and supported them to speak about their achievements. One relative described how staff ensured they maintained contact with their family member. “Staff have sent me a message to say they are going to visit with them (family member) and bring them to us, which is nice. We’re a long way away”.

We observed staff interacting with people with patience and kindness. Some people became agitated and directed their frustrations towards staff in a physical and verbal manner. Staff remained calm, set clear boundaries for people and communicated in a way the person could understand. People had keys to their own rooms so they could maintain their privacy.

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.

We observed staff respecting people’s choices. Some people liked to talk about the things that they had done and staff encouraged this. Other people liked their own space and quiet and this too was respected and understood by staff.

People’s cultural and faith needs were documented in people’s care plans together with their strengths, abilities and preferences. This included people’s preferred routines, what people enjoyed and also circumstances that people found difficult to process of which staff should be aware. People told us that special events were celebrated such as holidays and birthdays, which was important to them.

People’s homes were personalised with photographs and pictures. People had been involved in the décor of their bedrooms which reflected people’s personalities. This created a homely atmosphere where people could relax.

The service did not always have a proactive and positive culture of safety.

There were significant omissions in daily records relating to people’s health and safety. The provider told us there were issues with the internet which meant that staff were not always able to access records in a timely manner. The provider had implemented checks on these records and some were being completed on paper, but this was not consistent. Without consistent or complete information, the service could not effectively identify, monitor and act when required.

Lessons learned were discussed at team meetings and as a result changes had been made to make improvements. However, lessons learnt about best practice in manging potential risks and staff practice with regards to safeguarding had not been implemented consistently. Guidance in minimising the risk of people being constipated and safeguarding procedures had not always been followed.

People with anxieties which they may present verbally or physically had positive behavioural support plans (PBS). PBS isa person-centred approach to understanding and managing challenging behaviours, focusing on preventing them and improving quality of life. These plans were developed and monitored by the provider’s national PBS team. However, the team had significantly reduced in numbers so they were not able to provide the necessary level of support to staff and people. PBS plans had not been reviewed yearly as planned which meant it could not be assured guidance for staff was the most up to date and effective. The provider told us there were plans to train a staff member locally to provide this support going forwards.

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.

We observed staff responding to people’s needs in a timely manner. One person said to staff that they wanted to go out. Staff responded and explained that they would go out later that morning and this outing took place. Another person was very distressed. Staff used a variety of approaches to respond to communicate with them throughout the day to endeavour to ease their anxieties.

People’s care records provided staff with enough information on how to support people who could not verbalise if they were in pain or distress. They described how changes in people’s face, skin, breathing or body posture could indicate if the person was content or unhappy.

Staff were confident they understood people’s verbal and non-verbal clues to gauge if people were happy and content and when they were not their usual selves.

The service did not always have a proactive and positive culture of safety.

There were significant omissions in daily records relating to people’s health and safety. The provider told us there were issues with the internet which meant that staff were not always able to access records in a timely manner. The provider had implemented checks on these records and some were being completed on paper, but this was not consistent. Without consistent or complete information, the service could not effectively identify, monitor and act when required.

Lessons learned were discussed at team meetings and as a result changes had been made to make improvements. However, lessons learnt about best practice in manging potential risks and staff practice with regards to safeguarding had not been implemented consistently. Guidance in minimising the risk of people being constipated and safeguarding procedures had not always been followed.

People with anxieties which they may present verbally or physically had positive behavioural support plans (PBS). PBS isa person-centred approach to understanding and managing challenging behaviours, focusing on preventing them and improving quality of life. These plans were developed and monitored by the provider’s national PBS team. However, the team had significantly reduced in numbers so they were not able to provide the necessary level of support to staff and people. PBS plans had not been reviewed yearly as planned which meant it could not be assured guidance for staff was the most up to date and effective. The provider told us there were plans to train a staff member locally to provide this support going forwards.