Wellburn House

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.

Staff supported people with kindness and compassion, and people were involved as partners in their care.

This meant people were treat with dignity and respect but now always in line with their wishes.

This service scored 65 (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 treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion.

We observed some warm and caring interactions. Staff spent time with people engaging in pleasant mutual conversation and meaningful activity. Staff were heard commenting to a person who had just been to the hairdressers, “Oh, you look lovely. Your hair is beautiful.” People responded positively to these interactions and told us, “Staff are lovely!”

People were comfortable and at ease in the presence of staff and family members told us how staff care about their loved ones. One told us, “I’m sure they’re caring and kind. I visit every day and I think I would see it if they weren’t.”

One staff member told us, “We’re a homely home and we love our residents."

Visitors and healthcare professionals were welcomed into the home. A healthcare professional commented, “I am very happy with the quality of care at the home.”

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or made sure people’s care, support and treatment met their individual needs and preferences.

Each person had personalised care plans detailing their background, individual needs and preferences. However, during our assessment, there were three examples where staff did not always deliver care in line with those needs and preferences relating to moving and handling, nail care and nutrition and hydration. Whilst the registered manager took immediate steps to remedy these, such observations were not fully demonstrative of people being treated as individuals.

The provider considered people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics when offering activities. Staff had arranged a ‘Christmas food market’ for people who had altered diets and a bespoke trip was organised for a person to attend a local sporting venue where they had never been and always wanted to go.

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

People were supported to be independent. They were offered choice and maintained control over their daily lives whilst staff remained conscious of risks and safety. Staff were heard speaking to a person who was struggling with a mobility aid, “Are you okay? Can I help you?”

People could choose to invite their relatives to events. One relative had joined a person on an ice-skating outing which was an enjoyable experience for them both.

Staff supported one person to use the public transport network to access local amenities. This allowed them to maintain their independence and gave them a real sense of worth.

Staff respected another person’s wish to reconnect with veteran colleagues at a local club. This had a positive impact on the person and allowed them to exercise their choice and control.

The provider did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

During our first visit, we observed there were missed opportunities to respond to people’s needs, requests and distressed reactions in a timely manner. People told us they didn’t always get their call bell answered promptly and there were occasions during our visit where call bells were not always responded to in a timely manner. One person told us how they had to leave their room during the night to find a staff member to assist them.

Staff knew how to follow escalation processes to seek appropriate support for people. However, some healthcare professionals reported staff could seek support for people in a timelier manner.

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

There were clear systems in place for staff supervision, training, feedback and resources available to support wellbeing initiatives.

There was an on-site staff room which some staff found inaccessible due to its location. However, staff also had access to the conservatory area, dining spaces and outdoor areas where they could enjoy their rest periods.

Staff benefitted from the organisational employee assistance and employee value programmes where they could access health and wellbeing support. The provider also carried out periodic wellbeing calls with staff.

There was an active organisational social programme which staff enjoyed. The provider operated other homes in the area and staff interacted with each other in fun social activities organised by the provider.

In a recent staff survey, staff commented positively about wellbeing support and initiatives.