Tower View Residential 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 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 and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect. People told us staff treated with kindness. People told us staff were kind to them. One person explained how most staff supported them in a compassionate and dignified way when their mental wellbeing was compromised and their need for support increased. We saw people being supported kindly and in a dignified way during the inspection by staff.

Staff shared how they had supported someone when a family member was unwell, including ensuring they could visit when they chose and also being kept up to date with their health and treatment.

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. Care plans reflected people’s individual choices and preferences. One person was a vegetarian, and they had been supported to ensure they were able to choose vegetarian options from the menu of food from Tower House. Two people had been supported to find and sustain voluntary work in their community, and 1 person told us they were being supported to find a home to move to that had less support. Whilst this was happening they were being supported with some small steps toward more independence such as taking the medicines independently at certain times during the day.

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. People were not encouraged to be independent within their home.

For example, people were not encouraged to develop daily living skills, nor did they independently manage their meals and food. The provider supplied meals from the professional kitchen of Tower House which was situated nearby.

People did not do their own weekly shopping; this was also completed by the sister service.

During the inspection we found kitchen cupboards had very little food in them apart from some cereals and spreads. The fridge was also empty with only milk and a pudding in it. This meant people did not have the choice of preparing their own snacks or meals if they wished to. Two of the 3 people told us they wanted to be more independent in managing their food.

However, staff did support people at times to maintain some independence. People went out independently into their local community and 2 people had part time voluntary jobs in local charity shops.

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.

Staff were not present in the service for significant periods during the day and were not present overnight. All 3 people had all been assessed by the local authority as requiring 24-hour support. By not providing the assessed support the provider could not assure themselves people were safe, nor could staff b assured they were responding in a timely way as they were not always present in the service. People told us they had to go and find staff from Tower House if they needed support. This was addressed with the provider and the local authority during the inspection, and they ensured that staff were at the house through the night.

People told us when staff were present in the home they did listen to and respond to them.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to deliver appropriate care to people. We were told by staff that the service manager was approachable and supportive.

The provider ensured staff received regular supervisions. These were completed by the service manager. Staff we spoke to told us the service manager and had an open-door policy for staff to be able to address issues and share ideas outside supervisions. They were confident if the spoke to the service manager they would be listened to and any issues would be addressed.