Grenham Bay Court

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 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 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 told us staff were kind and helped them when they needed it, “They are lovely and help me.” Relatives told us, “They bring in little treats for her; they are very kind and understanding people”.

Staff knew people well, we observed staff chatting with people about their families. Staff spoke to people kindly and responded when they became anxious. We observed staff knocking on people’s doors before entering and closing the bedroom curtains when providing support.

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. People told us staff supported them in the way they preferred. We observed people being offered lunches which met their dietary needs including vegetarian options. People had personalised their rooms to include their own furniture, ornaments and photos.

Relatives described how staff supported their family member, “The staff are very good; they’re trained to read her moods, from time to time she gets upset thinking about her old home and they’ll rally round her.”People were supported to take part in activities they enjoyed. People were observed playing bingo, knitting and going out with their families. People were supported to spend time with their family at their home or out for a meal. Staff accompanied people out for trips including trips to wildlife parks and military museums.

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. Some people using the service had dementia. They were not always supported to find their room or their way around the building. Some bedrooms had different coloured doors, but others were all the same with no distinguishing features. People’s bedroom doors did not have their name, photo they recognised or memory box to support people living with dementia to find their room.

There was some pictorial signage around the service, but this was not continuous along the corridors. For example, there was a sign for the lounge at the start of the corridor but there were no more to support people if they forgot where they were going while walking along the corridor. Some signs did not include all the information about what was in the rooms such as the shower room on the ground floor. The signs did not show there was a toilet in the room. We observed a person who was stood outside the shower room ask staff where the toilet was. When staff showed them inside the shower room, the person commented they did not realise as the sign did not say there was a toilet. The registered manager had not considered how some people needed accurate information on the doors to communal rooms.

During the assessment, we observed drinks and snacks being provided. Staff made people drinks and gave out biscuits without asking people what they would like. While this showed staff knew people’s usual preferences, they had not been given the opportunity to have a different drink or snack.

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. When people spent time in the lounge, there was not always staff present to respond if they needed support. People did not always have access to a call bell to summon staff. We observed a person spill their drink onto the floor, there was no staff present and people were walking around which placed them at risk of slipping. A person started to clean the spill with paper towels from the toilet, they had nearly finished before a member of staff entered the lounge.

Some people wore a call bell pendant so they could call staff. A relative told us, “Her room is at the end of a corridor, and she sometimes has to wait a little for someone to come when she presses the buzzer, but she hasn’t said it’s been a problem for her.”

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 management team and were able to raise any concerns with them. Staff described how their shift pattern supported their responsibilities at home.

Staff told us they felt listened to; they gave the example of the introduction of ‘walkie-talkies’ to help with communication. Staff had raised concerns about locating other staff when they needed help in another part of the building. We observed staff using the walkie-talkie and it enabled staff to support their colleagues when they needed it.