Parkwood 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 outstanding. At this assessment the rating has changed to good.

This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 75 (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.

Relatives consistently described staff as kind, caring and compassionate. One relative told us, “The staff are incredible, I can’t praise them highly enough,” while another said staff were “the most wonderful group of people I have met.” People and relatives told us staff respected privacy and maintained dignity when providing care and support. We observed warm and respectful interactions between staff and people living at the service, including staff taking time to chat with people, sharing conversations about personal interests and supporting people in a calm and compassionate way. Staff supported people during activities and encouraged social engagement. Structured observations showed positive interactions and people appeared comfortable in the presence of staff. Care records demonstrated staff understood people's histories, preferences and emotional needs and adapted their approach accordingly. People knew who to speak to if they had concerns and told us issues they raised were usually acted upon. Overall, feedback from people, relatives, professionals and our observations showed a caring culture where people were treated with respect and kindness.

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.

People and relatives consistently told us staff knew them well and understood what was important to them.

Care plans contained detailed person-centred information about people's histories, interests, relationships, communication needs and preferences. Relatives told us staff knew people's routines, hobbies and interests and tailored support accordingly. One relative said, “They know her very well,” while another told us staff ensured their family member could take part in activities they enjoyed. We saw examples of personalised support, including arranging meaningful experiences linked to people's former occupations and interests, supporting people to visit local parks, cafés and pubs, and promoting opportunities for social engagement. The service provided a range of activities designed to meet different interests and needs, including music, arts, one-to-one sessions and community involvement. The service considered people's cultural and religious needs and supported access to faith-based activities where this was important to people. Professionals, relatives and our observations demonstrated staff understood people as individuals and adapted support to meet their needs.

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

People and relatives told us staff promoted choice wherever possible and encouraged people to make decisions about their daily lives. Relatives told us staff encouraged people to retain skills and independence and supported them to make everyday decisions, including choices about what to wear, where to spend their time and how they wished to receive support. We saw people choosing where they spent their day, participating in activities they enjoyed and accessing the community.

Staff supported people to maintain relationships with family and friends and families told us they could visit without restriction.

We observed staff offering choices and supporting people at their own pace. Feedback from relatives and professionals demonstrated people were supported to remain as independent as possible while receiving safe and appropriate support.

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 escalating concerns to healthcare professionals and responding appropriately following incidents. Care records evidenced ongoing monitoring of people's wellbeing and referrals to external healthcare professionals when needed.

Relatives told us communication about accidents, health concerns and changes in wellbeing was good and they were kept informed.

We observed staff responding to people requesting support and providing reassurance when people became distressed. Care plans included guidance to help staff respond to changing needs, including physical health needs, emotional wellbeing and behavioural support needs.

The service worked alongside a range of healthcare professionals to help ensure continuity of care. However, one person told us they sometimes experienced delays when using their call bell and felt staff did not always recognise people's cues when they needed support and were not able to verbally communicate their needs. Despite this feedback, relatives, professionals and our observations indicated people received support when they needed it and staff acted to address changing risks and concerns.

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

Staff described a positive and supportive culture where managers were approachable and encouraged open communication. Staff told us they received training, supervision and opportunities for professional development. The provider offered progression pathways, specialist training programmes and mentoring opportunities. We saw evidence of investment in staff development through leadership programmes, assistant practitioner development, specialist dementia training and competency assessments.

Staff spoke positively about teamwork and said they felt able to raise concerns, make suggestions and seek support when needed. The provider promoted staff wellbeing through reward and recognition initiatives, wellbeing programmes, social events and support networks. Staff surveys, meetings and supervision arrangements gave staff opportunities to share feedback and contribute to service improvements.

Relatives and professionals described staff as knowledgeable, experienced and committed to providing good care.

The provider had created a positive culture focused on learning, development and supporting staff wellbeing, which helped staff provide compassionate care.