Wolfe House 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 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.

People and their relatives told us staff were caring in their approach. One person told us, “They are nice, all the staff are nice and caring.” One relative said, “The staff are amazing and very caring.”

We observed individual interactions with people were kind. Staff had a gentle approach to people and regularly enquired about how they were. When offering any support, staff gave regular encouragement and reassurance to people.

Staff told us they understood the need to support people in a respectful way when supporting them with personal care. One staff member told us, “We close curtains and the doors, we need to respect their dignity and privacy.”

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.

Whilst staff were aware of people’s needs, they were unable to share details regarding people’s life histories, past occupations, hobbies and interests or family connections. This meant they were unable to bring this information into conversations or use details to tailor people’s support and build relationships. The registered manager told us this information was available to staff through people’s care plans, and we confirmed this was the case. The registered manager assured us they would explore ways of ensuring staff were aware of this information and understood its importance.

Staff did not always demonstrate a respectful approach to people’s individual needs. For example, continence aids were not stored discreetly in people’s rooms. Where the en-suite in 1 person room needed to be kept locked, a large piece of wood had been nailed to the door. This looked unsightly and disrespectful to the person.

In other ways we observed staff treated people as individuals by respecting their choices, understanding where people wanted to spend their time and knowing people’s preferences.

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 made their own choices and decisions, and these were respected by staff. One person told us, “I don’t like to sit in the lounge, there’s too many people. I prefer being in my room and they don’t try to make me. I like them to come to me earlier in the morning [to support with care] and they generally do that.”

Staff were heard to offer people choices throughout the day. Staff told us they would always ask for people’s preferences when supporting people with their care. One staff member said, “We will ask them if they prefer a shower or a wash in the morning, we ask what clothes they would like and show different choices, they will choose where they want to sit and how they like their drinks.”

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and in the majority of circumstances acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Staff were on the whole attentive to people’s requests for assistance. However, we observed an occasion where staff did not recognise people’s discomfort in relation to short bursts of noise created by the building works. Although people were visibly disturbed by this, staff did not appear to recognise people’s discomfort or offer reassurance. We spoke with the registered manager who acted to ensure people’s comfort and assured us the building work was reaching completion.

At other times staff responded promptly to support people’s requests. One person asked when lunch would be ready. The staff member told them this was some time away but asked if they wanted a snack. The person told them they would prefer a drink, and the staff member went to make them a cup of tea immediately. We heard 1 person become upset as they did not believe they had taken their medicines. The staff member offered reassurance and helped the person remain calm whilst explaining when this had been taken.

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 by the registered manager and the provider. One staff member told us, “I am very comfortable with [registered manager and care co-ordinator], they are gentle and kind.” A second staff member said, “[Registered manager] is very friendly, you can speak to her at any time.”

We saw cards sent to the registered manager in acknowledgement of their kindness when staff had needed additional support either whilst at work or due to personal issues. The registered manager told us they were committed to having an open-door policy where staff felt they could raise any concerns and speak freely. They told us, “It’s said you should not bring your personal life to work with you, but we all know that’s not always possible. If I can help them with anything and that means they will be happier at work then I will.”