Meadow Acres

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 changed to requires improvement. This meant people were not always supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to people’s dignity.

This service scored 55 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People were supported by staff who spoke fondly about the people they supported. We observed some interactions with people where you could see staff and people had built a positive relationship. We observed some interactions where people and staff showed compassion for each other. However, we did see some relationships where staff did not always consider people’s individual preferences and desires. Staff practices during personal care lacked continuity and did not demonstrate reassurance, dignity or respect, with frequent staff changes and limited communication contributing to a person becoming distressed. In addition, the use of ‘tartan bibs’ did not uphold people’s dignity, as there was no evidenced rationale for their use, many individuals did not require them, and management had not explored more dignified alternatives designed to resemble ordinary clothing.

People were not always treated as individuals. They did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics. While some people had opportunities to engage in activities of their choosing, such as visiting the pub or going to the library, others did not have the same level of personalised support. We observed that some people had developed meaningful relationships with those they lived with, which contributed positively to their emotional wellbeing. However, not everyone shared common interests, and some individuals appeared less connected with others in the home and as such the provider needed to consider the compatibility of some people living together. People maintained relationships with those who were important to them. One person told us, “I talk to staff, watch TV, and do my shopping. I am alright, I get happy when I go out. I say hello to the people who live here. I talk to staff more. I went on holiday, I went centre parks. That was good.”

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 always supported to have full choice and control of their daily lives. Daily records and observations showed limited evidence of staff encouraging individuals to carry out tasks for themselves. In some cases, support was overly directive, rather than enabling. However, we did observe one person taking their clothes to the laundry and staff asking the person what they would like to eat, demonstrating that opportunities for independence were possible when appropriately supported.

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.We observed people communicating verbally and through body language to express what they wanted to do. In some circumstances staff reacted positively and immediately, however, there were examples where staff did not truly listen to what the person was trying to communicate. For example, one person was known to be distressed during personal care, the registered manager said that to ease the persons emotional distress staff were required to talk to the person throughout, however this did not occur. At the time the registered manager intervened to ensure the person was not in distress.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of staff. Staff shared they felt support by the management team and that they valued the staff. While overall wellbeing was described as good, staff also shared they could have further support with development of their skills and creating a supportive environment. Staff reported feeling able to approach the manager. One staff member said, “Yes, the management team is approachable and supportive. We have regular handovers, staff meetings, training, and supervisions, which provide opportunities to raise concerns, reflect on practice, and receive guidance.” All staff had the opportunity to participate in meetings and supervision. They confirmed these occasions provided them with opportunities to ask questions and provide feedback on their experiences.