Downs View Care Centre

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 most people felt well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

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 did not always treat people with kindness, empathy or compassion, and staff did not consistently respect people’s privacy or dignity. We observed occasions where staff did not act in a caring or respectful way, and the quality of interactions between staff, people and relatives varied. On 2 occasions, we observed people who were not treated with kindness or respect; these concerns were raised with the nominated individual, who took immediate action.

We also observed a person in the communal lounge whose clothing was not appropriately covering them. Professionals raised similar concerns, noting occasions when residents’ clothing did not fully cover them during transfers using equipment.

Despite these issues, people and relatives mainly gave positive feedback. One person described staff as “all caring and compassionate,” and another said the “vast majority are kind and caring.”

This meant there were examples of warm and compassionate interactions, but people did not always receive respectful care, and their dignity was not always upheld.

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or ensure their care reflected their needs and preferences. Staff did not consistently consider people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture, protected characteristics or what mattered most to them. One relative told us, “People can engage, but staff just don’t.” We observed staff entering a communal area without acknowledging people, and one member of staff spoke about a person as though they were not present. Staff told us some colleagues required further training to develop their interpersonal communication skills, and that a workshop was planned. This meant people did not always receive care that recognised them as individuals or fully supported their identity and sense of self, although some caring, individualised interactions were observed.

Despite these shortfalls, there were examples of personalised care. One relative said the activities lead was “really good with [relative],” and a professional told us staff appeared to know people well.

The provider promoted people’s independence, ensuring they understood their rights and had choice and control over their care, treatment and wellbeing. During a lunchtime observation, we saw people being offered a choice of meals using visual plates to support decision‑making. A range of meaningful activities was available to everyone. We observed an exercise group taking place and a therapeutic animal session involving a lamb, which people appeared to enjoy. Staff were also seen offering opportunities for people to participate in activities or choose alternative tasks, helping individuals remain engaged in ways that suited their preferences.

Staff told us they encouraged people to make everyday choices, such as clothes, drinks, desserts and activities, asking questions like, “What would you like to do today?” People also described feeling supported to maintain their independence. One person told us, “I like getting up early and doing as much as I can for myself. Sometimes they’ll come in and help me take a shower.”

The provider demonstrated an understanding of people’s needs, views and wishes, and staff were able to respond sensitively to support people’s comfort and emotional wellbeing. Staff told us they recognised that some people could become confused or distressed and described using simple, reassuring prompts, such as offering a drink or taking time to talk with people, to provide reassurance.

We saw a member of staff support a person displaying distressed behaviour by offering them a cup of tea and spending time talking with them, which helped to calm and reassure the individual. Relatives also told us that staff were attentive and offered support when people needed assistance.

The provider cared about and actively promoted the wellbeing of their staff, creating an environment where staff felt supported, valued and enabled to deliver person‑centred care. There was a supervision schedule in place for the year, supported by clear managerial guidance on how to carry out effective supervision. Staff were also recognised through an ‘employee of the month’ scheme, and their views were routinely gathered through surveys to help inform service improvements.

The nominated individual told us they were supporting a staff member to return from maternity leave and had implemented flexible working arrangements to help them transition back into the workplace and manage their childcare responsibilities.

Staff spoke positively about the culture and the support they received. Comments included, “It’s really supportive here,” “There are good relationships,” and described their colleagues as “brilliant and supportive.”