Wymeswold Manor

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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

This service scored 60 (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 did not always treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. However, staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

The provider had not ensured sufficient staff were available to enable people to consistently receive care and support in a timely and dignified way. People told us of waiting prolonged periods for assistance, which had a negative impact on their comfort, wellbeing and experience of care. A person told us, person said, “Sometimes they [staff] are slow in responding to anyone who wants to go the toilet. If I ask, they are slow sometimes.”

The environment was visibly unclean and poorly maintained in places, which did not promote people's dignity or demonstrate a caring culture. The condition of the environment did not reflect the standards people should expect when receiving care and support.

While individual staff showed kindness and compassion in their interactions, they were working within an environment that was not well maintained and meant people's needs could not always be met promptly or in a way that upheld their dignity.

Staff supported people’s privacy in day-to-day care. Personal care was provided in private spaces, and support with continence and personal needs was managed discreetly. Staff were also attentive to people’s emotional wellbeing, responding to changes in mood and offering reassurance where needed. One staff member told us, “I love my job and I love the home, I always believe you get out of a job what you put into it and I give 100% every shift, the time I spend with the residents I hope brings them comfort and security I love having a giggle with them and hope this makes their day a lot more enjoyable.” Another staff member said, “I’ve met the most lovely people living here, people worked in factories, 1 is a professor, a lady who had taken a trip across to America, lived in Australia. it’s a beautiful tapestry of people’s lives.”

People spoke positively about the way they were treated by staff. A person told us, “[Staff] try to make it as comfortable as possible for me. They treat me with respect, friendly. I can’t say a bad word about [staff].” Another said, “The care is very good. They [staff] don’t interfere. They let me do what I want to do.”

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

We found that some of the care and support was very task-led. As part of their role, care staff were expected to provide activities and social engagement for people living at the service. However, staff told us they often needed to prioritise people’s personal care and support needs due to workload pressures, which meant they frequently had limited or no time to provide meaningful activities and interaction for people. We did not observe any activities taking place during the 2 days on site for the inspection. A staff member said, “I must admit staffing levels haven’t always been great, we had enough staff but if somebody rang in sick it would put a strain on us.”

A person told us, “Activities are a bit sparse now. They ought to entertain us. Two girls have left. They kept us going. My [relative] thinks the [provider] should pay for a co-ordinator. We used to play ball games, and skittles, but now not very often.”

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

During our inspection, we observed staff offering people choices in a respectful and unhurried manner. This included choices about what they wanted to eat and drink, where they wished to sit, and how they wanted to spend their day. Staff took time to listen to people's preferences and acted on the decisions they made. A person told us, “I can make my own tea. I choose where I have my meals. I have my independence. If I wanted a lie in, I could have one.”

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of the importance of promoting independence and encouraging people to do as much as possible for themselves. A staff member told us, “I enjoy making a difference to the residents' lives and being a part of that, giving the best care and compassion that I can.”

Staff responded to people’s needs as they arose and took action to reduce discomfort, anxiety or distress. Staff were committed to supporting people and demonstrated a caring approach in their interactions. However, staffing pressures and competing demands limited their ability to respond consistently and promptly to all people's needs. This meant people did not always receive care and support at the time they needed it, which had the potential to impact their comfort, dignity and overall experience of care. A person told us, “The staff always seem very busy. At certain times there are not enough.”

A call bell system was in place to enable people to summon assistance or alert staff when support was required. During our inspection, we observed staff responding promptly when people requested support and interacting with people in a calm and reassuring manner.

Staff demonstrated an understanding that not everyone was able to communicate their needs verbally. They described how they recognised signs that a person required assistance through observing facial expressions, body language and changes in usual routines or behaviours. One staff member told us, “I understand non-verbal communication by observing facial expressions, body language and routine.” This helped staff to identify when people needed support and respond appropriately to their immediate needs.

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

Staff told us they felt supported in their roles and had access to management when they needed guidance or assistance. Staff received regular supervision sessions, which provided opportunities to discuss their performance, development needs and any challenges they faced in their work.

The provider created opportunities for staff to share feedback, raise concerns and suggest improvements to the service and their working experience. Most staff spoke positively about the support they received from managers and felt listened to. One staff member told us, "I feel supported as management is easily accessible, I’m given regular trainings and supervision, I can raise concerns and ask for guidance when needed."

The provider told us they monitored staffing levels and where staffing shortages arose, they used staff from their other services rather than relying on unfamiliar agency staff wherever possible.