Wrottesley Park House 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 remained good.

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

This service scored 70 (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.

People and relatives felt there could be better interactions between staff and people. One person said, “I am usually very happy here. It does depend on which staff are on. Some are miserable and that makes a huge difference to my day. Most of them make me feel uplifted at the beginning of the day, others just don’t speak when they come into my room. Even when they bring me a drink, they just put it down and don’t speak”. Another person told us, “Some of them care and some of them are here for the money, to do a job. They aren’t rough it’s just how they speak.” A relative commented, “I feel that some staff don’t want to be here. It’s just a feeling. Some sit down and do nothing whilst they could be interacting with people, even if they don’t use verbal communication, they could still interact.”

Other people and relatives raised no concerns. One person said, “The staff are all kind. If there’s something I want they get it for me”. Another person told us, “They respect my privacy and dignity by making sure the curtain and the door is always closed when I have personal care”.

We saw at times staff could interact better with people. For example, on 1 of the units, we saw for approximately 40 minutes different staff passed a person who was alone in a space without any interaction. In another unit, we saw a staff member sitting on the sofa with people without any engagement. In other instances, we saw staff interacting well with people. We saw staff engaged with people, about what was important to them. When people asked for support or interacted with staff, we saw they responded positively.

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences.

People and relatives felt their needs and preferences were considered. One person told us, “I decide on everything I do. I make all my own decisions about my care”.

People had the opportunity to attend activities and social events that were specific to their individual needs. For example, various events were held in the home including women’s and men’s clubs, free blood pressure checks, breast cancer awareness sessions and menopause awareness.

There were systems in place to ensure people were delivered care that was specific to their needs. People and those important to them participated in regular reviews of their care to ensure the information was up to date and reflective of their current 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 told us they made their own choices. One person said, “I get choices. They know me well. They call me [name] which I like.” Another person told us, “I do make all my own decisions about my care. I do what I want when I want. I’m a night owl. I stay awake sometimes until about 4am. My relative visits until 1.30am sometimes. It’s all ok with them.” Another person commented, “I make all my own decisions about what I do. I chose when to go to bed and get up and what to wear. I can get outside as I can open the door from my bedroom to outside”.

We saw people were offered various choices throughout the site visit. At lunchtime people were offered a choice of meals and when they did not want either of these they were given alternates that were not on the menu. People were offered a variety of drinks with their food. Some asked for a bottle of water, which they were provided with.

When people were not able to verbally communicate, plans considered this, and the actions people took to express their choices. Staff had information about people as care plans and risk assessments considered how they supported people to make choices and remain independent. Staff we spoke with knew people well and were aware of these plans and how they included people in their care.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes.

People felt their needs were responded to. One person told us, “I did once tell [name] I felt rushed in the shower as we only get 20 minutes, it wasn’t enough for me as I have constricted legs. He sorted it out. I get longer now”. Another person said, “[Name] is the manager. I know him well. He knows me too. He’s good. We have residents’ meetings here. I go to them. We talk about the home. It’s all good here. Nothing could be better. I would recommend it.”

People had the opportunity to express their views through meetings, reviews and the ‘resident of the day’ programme. When changes occurred to people’s needs information was shared with staff through various methods including the handover process, to ensure staff had the most up to date information about people.

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

The registered manager told us about their workforce and how they considered their wellbeing. This including staff engagement sessions and employee of the month incentives that were voted for by other staff, people and those important to them.

Staff we spoke with felt supported by the management team.