Sutton Grange

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.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to maintaining people’s dignity.

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 did not always ensure people had their dignity respected, but people were generally treated with kindness, empathy and compassion.

Due to ineffective staff deployment, people’s dignity was not always upheld. Several people told us they were regularly not supported to use the toilet straight away and explained how this affected their morale and self-worth. One person said, “If I ask for help to use the bathroom, staff will say they can’t help me but will come back as soon as they can. It makes me feel like a nuisance.” Another added, “If I have to go to the toilet, I have to wait. I’ve given up asking for help at mealtimes because I know how busy they are. Sometimes the waiting can be intolerable, it’s uncomfortable.” Several relatives gave similar feedback about the impact staffing had on people’s dignity and overall experience.

We observed occasions, people living with dementia were struggling to locate a toilet. Staff had not been readily available to offer direction or support, increasing the risk of incontinence and the impact to people’s dignity.

Staff were observed to be kind and caring, and feedback from people and relatives about staff was mostly positive. One person told us, “[Staff] are absolutely brilliant, they go out of their way to help you. They do everything they can, there’s just not enough of them.”

People confirmed they had their privacy respected and we saw staff knocking on bedroom doors before entering.

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences, but they did take into account people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations and unique backgrounds.

The provider did not always ensure people were treated as individuals. Poor staff deployment meant people could not always have their individual needs and preferred routines met. A staff member told us, “Care is sometimes task led because of time, we’ve always got the next task to do. If someone wanted 5 minutes to chat, they would have to wait for [activities staff].” A person living at the home said, “Sometimes it’s chaotic. Sometimes [staff] are rushing me saying they haven’t time and need to get to the next person.”

’Getting to know you’ booklets prompted people to consider and record their wishes and ambitions, and care plans included information about people’s individual needs and preferences. ‘Conversation clouds’ had been created to help staff and visitors engage and reorientate people with dementia. People’s bedrooms were personalised with furniture, photographs and ornaments.

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 have choice and control over their own care and treatment. The provider had an ‘Autonomy, independence and choice’ policy and people’s care plans prompted staff to promote decision making, choice and control.

The provider ensured people had access to meaningful hobbies and interests. A range of on-site activities were offered, and a member of the activities team was available to work with people cared for in bed. Resources such as books, fidget toys and dolls were available throughout the home and a weekly newsletter included puzzles, quizzes and historical facts, to help people reminisce.

People were able to maintain relationships with relatives and friends. Visitors were welcomed and able to use the bistro area to meet or attend activities with their loved ones. A children’s book had been created by the provider, to prepare children for their grandparents move into the home, providing reassurance about visits.

The provider did not always anticipate people's needs, views and wishes to ensure staff could respond in the moment and act to minimise people's discomfort, concern or distress.

Staff did not always have the time to respond to people’s needs quickly enough to avoid preventable discomfort or distress. When asked how quickly staff responded to call bells, we received the following responses, “One night I pressed the buzzer, and nobody came. I was just left.” Another added, “[Staff] come and help me but it’s not always straight away. Sometimes they’re so busy I have to wait a bit.” We requested call bell records to check how long people had to wait for support, but these were not available for us to review.

During the inspection, there were several occasions we had to intervene and seek staff support on behalf of people, because of the lack of staff presence in communal areas.

Care plans included information about the signs of pain staff should observe for, and how to respond to prevent discomfort or distress. Pain scales were used to check pain levels for people who struggled to communicate verbally.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff.

Staff felt valued by managers and colleagues. A staff member told us, “It’s a lovely place to work, staff care about each other.” An employee of the month initiative was in place and staff received small gestures of appreciation through ‘Thank you Thursdays’ and ‘Carer’s Day’ celebrations, which had positively impacted morale.

Managers supported staff if they were struggling at work or in their personal lives, and the provider had systems in place to promote staff wellbeing. Staff spoke positively about the registered manager and confirmed they were supportive and approachable. Wellbeing was covered in the employee handbook and staff had access to an app which provided access to various financial, wellbeing and reward programmes.