Ingleside Residential 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 service 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 changed to requires improvement.

This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

This service scored 60 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity.

Health and social care professionals were complimentary about working with the service.

Staff told us they always respected and upheld people’s dignity. A staff member said, “I do think our clients have a good, well cared for life and are supported by staff to help maintain their independence and dignity.”

One relative told us, “Staff showed real kindness and compassion.” Another relative said, “I have observed considerable patience, compassion, dignity and respect shown to other residents.”

People appeared comfortable with staff. We observed staff were friendly and kind towards people and each other.

The service did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences.

Staff told us they knew people well. One staff member said, “I will always give the clients choices,such as things to wear and encourage them to wear warm clothes if it is cold, and things like they would like to do so choice of activities like reading or watching tv.” Another staff member told us, “People’s religious and cultural needs are recorded in their care plans, and I make sure these are followed, such as respecting religious practices, dietary needs, and cultural preferences around privacy and dignity. I support social needs by spending time talking with people, listening to their concerns, and supporting meaningful interaction, while respecting those who prefer quiet or rest, especially overnight.”

We observed people sitting for long periods of time within the communal areas of the home with little meaningful activity or engagement.Activities were provided 3 times a week, which meantpeople often did not have any meaningful engagement with staff, and there was little to do all day except for sit in the living room facing the television.

Staff told us they would like to be able to spend more time with people and support them with things they like doing, such as reading books.

People’s care plans included information on interests and hobbies, however staff did not have the time to support people to explore their interests.

The service 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.

Staff knew people well and tried to encourage them to remain as independent as possible. A staff member said, “I support people to maintain their independence by encouraging them to do as much as they can for themselves, while providing support only where needed. For example, I allow people time to complete their personal care, choose their clothing, and move at their own pace, offering assistance only when required.”

Daily records we viewed indicated staff were task orientated and people’s quality of life was not always considered when staff provided care or support for example when supporting people with their meal.

People who were cared for in bed were left on their own for extended periods of time. This meant they were at increased risk of becoming isolated and their emotional needs not being met.

The provider did not demonstrate they were listening to or understanding people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

We observed some people wandered and looked for staff. We saw staff were often busy providing care to people who required 2 staff members for support. This meant there were frequent occasions where people were left on their own for extended periods of time which put them at risk of potential harm.

Some people did not have access to call bells as they were not available or placed out of reach. This meant people were unable to call for help if they needed it. The registered manager responded to our concerns in relation to this and ordered new call bells.

People who had access to call bells told us they were not always answered promptly. A person said, “I press it [call bell] and if someone comes up, I'm lucky.”

There was a lack of oversight and monitoring by the provider and the registered manager to ensure people’s needs were being responded to in a timely manner. Daily records were not monitored or audited. This meant we could not be assured people’s immediate needs were met and put people at potential risk of harm.

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

Staff told us they enjoyed working at the service and thought the registered manager was approachable.One staff member said, “I feel supported and appreciated, as if I am unsure of something there is support there frommanagement. I feel appreciated as always get thanked for the work I do from the owner and management and the clients and family members. I believe the service supports my wellbeing by ensuring I am okay on a daily basis and if I have any problems we will talk about them straight away.” Another staff member told us, “There is in place a one to one session every 3 months but if we have a concern about our wellbeing the registered manager or assistant manager are always available for support and a way forward.”

Supervision meetings were used to discuss staff’s wellbeing.