Pembroke House

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 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 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 told us most staff were kind, friendly and approachable. Comments included, “Staff are kind and caring”, “Staff are very friendly, always getting to you to do things. They all knock on the door”, “In general, most staff are kind and caring. I usually have the same staff supporting me, so I have got to know them well. There are some agency staff who do not know you. At times there is very little engagement from agency staff, and I feel they are not always as interested in you as an individual” and “They treat me with dignity and respect.”

We observed a number of positive interactions throughout the assessment. Staff had an open, friendly rapport with people and knew people very well. Care provided was person centred, people were treated with respect and were supported to spend their time how they chose. When people became anxious or upset staff responded promptly, such as offering distraction or a change of environment. Staff responded promptly to protect people's dignity. During our visit, a staff member quickly supported a person who was undressed in their room.

People were able to have their bedroom doors closed if they wanted them to be.

Relatives were mostly positive about the staff and the way they treated their loved ones. They described staff as caring, kind, attentive and patient. Staff respected people’s privacy, treated people with dignity and respect and always asked for consent to care. Comments included, “Some of the staff are great, they go above and beyond. Such as [staff member and staff member], they even come in on their day off”, “They are very kind and caring” and “They are really good with my mum and understand how to support her when she becomes anxious or wants to leave. They are patient and work with her rather than against her.”

The provider treated people as individuals but did not always make 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. During the assessment we observed an interaction between a staff member and a person they supported. The staff member pulled a chair out from the dining table with a person sat on it without asking the person or explaining what they were doing.

People were not always enabled to receive care and support which met their preferences. Some people told us they preferred baths and despite asking for these they were not supported to have one. They told us they had to have showers instead. People told us there was a shower rota. Comments included, “When you come to Pembroke House they told me my shower days. I would rather have a bath they said you can’t, we have a no bath. My shower days are Monday and Fridays. I would like a bath, but I have given up caring” and “I cannot have a bath at the moment because the bath is not working.”

Staff took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics. We observed staff respecting people’s choices and treating people as individuals. For example, calling people by their preferred names. People’s cultural and religious needs were documented in the summary of their care plans. However, people’s care plans did not show how people were supported to meet their religious needs. Such as visiting a place of worship or have visits from religious ministers/clergy if this was their wish.

Activities staff told us that holy communion took place at the service once a month. They said, “We have a lady on the ground floor who has someone come in and read the bible with them. We have remembrance services and Christmas and Easter services. We do not have any people who are Muslim, Jewish, Jehovah Witness. We listen to songs of praise on a Sunday, the ladies love this.”

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 enabled to move around the service according to their wants and wishes, they were able to visit friends and loved ones on different floors. We observed people and their relatives utilising the communal spaces within the service as well as spending time together in their own rooms. Some people were able to access the community independently and some required support. There were large and spacious well-maintained gardens which people could utilise when the weather was nice.

People were encouraged and supported to join in activities taking place across the service. There was a varied choice of activities available for people. The activities schedule on display showed various events such as, art, quizzes, bingo, movie afternoons, singalongs, music and movement, mobile zoo visits and games. These were led by internal activities staff. External entertainers also visited the service for planned activities. A staff member told us, “We consistently have 2 activities a day 7 days a week. Exercise activities are popular, more so with the female external activities facilitator as she is very enthusiastic. Bingo is very popular and quizzes are popular too. We need to do more planned days out.”

Pembroke House had regular visits from a nursery and the cadets. Staff told us people enjoyed this. A staff member told us, “We also have a group called sensations for the generations, it is interactive and new mums and babies come and do a baby class in the lounge. We used to have a gardening, knitting and puzzle clubs but demand has changed. They are trying to get pots of herbs and flowers planted as an activity they are doing this now.”

We observed people enjoying the activities, they were smiling, laughing and taking part. A person told us they enjoyed the activities. They said, “We have lots of activities I get involved in like games and films,” Another person said, “Activities have degraded, there are less activities, less trips out, music needs to come up to date. Since [previous registered manager and staff member] left, it has been cut right down. Music is a big hit here, [entertainer] does dance fit. Me and a chap [friend] downstairs, he has Parkinson’s we really enjoy it.”

Relatives told us, “My mum does not take advantage of the activities, although I think the activities provided are good. There is just not much that appeals to her” and “The activities are good.”

People told us they were supported with maintaining contact with their friends and relatives. Comments included, “I do not need much support with this. I have my own landline and regularly keep in contact with family and friends” and “My daughter phones me every Sunday on my mobile phone. I do not need support to stay in contact with family, although I have seen staff helping other residents.” Relatives shared how their loved ones were enabled to continue their relationships with their spouses and wider family. A relative said, “I think they do a really good job helping them continue living as a couple despite being on different floors.”

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

We observed staff responding to people’s needs in a timely manner. At busy times when care staff were supporting people to get up and ready for the day, staff attended to people using their call bells and listened to what the person wanted. Staff provided explanations and told people they would go back to them when they finished supporting another person. We observed they did go back and provide support when they said they would. However, we received mixed feedback on how responsive staff were to call bells. A person said, “I do not know what the staffing levels should be, but I was impressed when I saw how quickly staff responded to a call bell.” Another person told us, “If you press the call bell, you can wait a long time for a response.” A person told us that they had been incontinent due to the wait and then needed more support as they required care and support to clean up and change their clothes. A person told us the provider had listened to people’s needs in relation to installing a call bell outside. They said, “One positive change is that management listened when residents suggested having a call bell outside.”

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. The provider had systems and processes in place to promote and support staff wellbeing. An employee assistance programme was in place. However, we received mixed feedback from staff regarding the support they received for their wellbeing. A staff member said, “They do not really support my wellbeing.” Another staff member told us there was no support. Other staff told us, “I think we have wellbeing support, we have healthcare and access to glasses” and “There are wellbeing packages, more comes on after the probation period.” Staff told us they had not always had the opportunity to have flexible working around childcare when they needed it.