The Laurels and The Limes 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 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 did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

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.

The provider did not always treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion, or respect their privacy and dignity. However, staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect. We observed staff interacting with people and whilst they were kind and caring they were often task focused and did not always promote meaningful engagement. Staff did not always support people in line with their care plans, which meant people's individual preferences and needs were not consistently reflected in their care. One staff member said, “I regularly talk with residents about their care and how staff treat them. I want to be able to make a positive impact on residents in my care and I believe I do. I am constantly asking questions and observing staff to ensure I have a grasp on what is happening, how certain staff work and how the care can be improved.”

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. The provider had an activity co-ordinator who provided social stimulation for people in the form of a regular activity program. This included bingo, crafting, baking and gardening. The activity co-ordinator also liaised with external agencies to source music an exercise-based activities. The home had good contacts with the local church and people attended coffee mornings there. People also enjoyed a monthly tea dance at a local theatre and shopping.

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. Staff did not always recognise and promote people’s preferences. For example, 1 person told us they would like to be supported to get out of bed and supported back to bed when they wanted to rest. Another person’s spectacles were sliding down their nose and causing them a concern, and another person was extremely distressed about a life event. Staff had not previously identified and responded to these concerns. We raised these issues with the current management team who took action to address them and gave us reassurances about how they have and will continue to improve their care and support.

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 some instances where staff had not responded in a timely was to address people’s needs. For example, some people expressed concerns about their care which had not been identified or addressed prior to our inspection. Following our inspection the manager took action to ensure people received a better quality of life. However, we observed staff responding to requests for support and call bells. People and relatives told us staff responded quickly when they called for assistance. One person said, “When I press my buzzer someone comes all the time.” Another person said, “If I call the bell they [staff] come in a reasonable time.”

The provider did not always care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff. They did not always support or enable staff to deliver person-centred care. The service has recently had some changes in the management structure, but prior to this staff did not feel supported. The current management team were working to improve this and had made some positive changes and staff felt more valued. However, new systems needed embedding into practice to ensure staff continued to feel supported to deliver person centred care for people.