Clifton Manor Residential 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.

Relatives told us staff were kind and supportive. Comments included, “At the moment every member of staff has been excellent in their approach to caring for [my family member],” and “[My family member] loves it and the care I have witnessed there, not only to them, but all residents, has been truly outstanding!”

People described staff as approachable and respectful. One person told us, “They’re kind and polite, the night staff too. They’re like friends.” Another person said, “The staff are kind and treat me well.”

Throughout our assessment visit we observed many examples of natural, kind and compassionate interactions between people and staff. Staff spoke warmly and used reassuring language when supporting people, including during moving and handling, and when responding to distress. We observed staff offering comfort in a respectful and person-centred way.

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.

There were systems and processes in place to ensure care was tailored to each person. Care plans included specific information, including a “This is me” section which recorded people’s histories, likes, needs and preferences. Relatives told us staff understood their family member as individuals and adapted support when needs or preferences changed. Staff used their knowledge of people to guide conversations and build rapport, which created familiar and comfortable interactions. Our observations showed staff knew people’s backgrounds and histories. We observed staff speaking with people about their interests and what was important to them and engaging with them in a warm and personalised way.

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

Staff supported people to have choice and control and encouraged independence where possible, while respecting their decisions. People were offered choices at mealtimes, including meal options and how they wished support to be provided. One person told us, “It’s brilliant! They ask us in advance what we’d like or will do you something else if you don’t like the menu.” People were able to participate in a range of activities both within and outside the home.

Although records showed people were supported with personal care in line with their documented wishes, some people told us they would like the option of more frequent showers or baths. This was shared with the registered manager, who arranged discussions with people and updated care plans where appropriate.

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 observed responding promptly to people’s immediate needs, including support with mobility, personal care and changes in health needs. Records showed people received timely reassurance and support during falls, episodes of distress and care interventions. Professionals described staff as responsive and accessible. Staff escalated concerns to senior staff, managers and external health professionals where required.

During the assessment visit, call bell responses were prompt and call bell data we reviewed supported this. However, feedback from people and relatives was mixed, with some reporting delays in receiving support, while others described staff responding quickly. Call bell data also indicated that response times had been longer at times previously. The registered manager identified this as an area for improvement and met with the staff team to discuss the importance of timely responses and the impact this could have on people’s experience of care. A relative told us, “It is rare that [my family member] has to wait for more than a couple of minutes if they need support.”

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff, and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. Staff described feeling listened to and supported, including good access to managers and flexibility when needed. One member of staff told us, “[The registered manager] is an excellent leader. If you have any challenge and discuss it with her, she will always help you through it.” Although staff spoke positively about working at the home, recent survey results showed some would welcome additional opportunities for career development and progression.