Newton Hall 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 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 benefitted from a kind, compassionate, and respectful staff team. Staff treated people with dignity and warmth. We observed positive interactions and staff demonstrated genuine care and attentiveness. People appeared at ease with staff and told us they felt cared for. Although the provider used agency staff, the core staff team knew people well and their day-to-day preferences were respected. People gave us examples where they felt staff had shown kindness and empathy. One person told us, “They [Staff] are very good to me. Anything I ask for they try and get it for me.” And “I couldn’t ask for a better place. The staff here are very nice to me, they help me with all sorts.”

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

The provider did not always involve people in planning their care. This meant care plans contained minimal information about the person, their wishes and preferences and did not support staff to provide person-centred care. No one we spoke with were able to talk about their care plans, but all felt their care was appropriate and what they wanted.

Whilst staff were limited in the time and interaction they could have with people, it was clear they knew people well and aimed to achieve the best possible outcomes they could. One staff member commented, “We could do with more staff, that way it would allow us to spend more time with people. It is getting better now we are getting more staff coming through.”

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People were supported to maintain their independence. People were walking around, having conversations with each other, and choosing where they sat to eat their meals. We observed planned activities in the communal areas, and for people who wished to stay in their rooms, we were assured they were included. There were planned group activities to support people to build relationships and reduce social isolation. A summer fare was in preparation for all to enjoy in the outdoors. People told us, staff will ask them about their day-to-day care and support needs, one person told us, “I can request anything, like say different food to be made or if I want to take part in any activities. It’s all my choice.”

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.

The use of agency staff, required more direction to support people combined with insufficient oversight from the provider and registered manager, meant people's needs were not always met in a timely manner. Staff told us they were frustrated by their inability to provide support promptly due to staffing shortages.

Domestic staff were often unable to begin their cleaning duties until later in the day because they were required to assist in other areas of the home, including the kitchen and supporting people with personal care. In addition, one person told us they had not had a bath for several weeks, despite having requested one. They explained staff often arrived to support them with personal care later in the morning, by which time they were already dressed, resulting in the bath not taking place.

The registered manager told us difficulties in recruiting new staff and securing additional staffing had been an ongoing issue. They explained they were unable to independently request certain roles, such as kitchen assistants and domestic staff, as approval was required from head office. However, we were informed additional staffing for these roles had been authorised by head office before the end of our assessment.

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

Staff were complimentary about the registered manager. They said they were supported well and if flexibility was needed at times, such as for personal issues, they were supported with this. Staff felt they could raise concerns and ideas for improvement and were listened to. Despite staffing issues, staff told us they worked well together and supported each other in their roles. When asked about the registered manager a staff member commented, “[Registered manager] is always available to anyone. We all know she will listen to our concerns, and [Registered Manager] will do her best.”