Moormead 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 requires improvement. 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.

In the last assessment we found people were not always treated with kindness, empathy and compassion. In this assessment we observed staff interacted with kindness and treated people with respect and dignity.

In this assessment we observed staff interacted with kindness, compassion and dignity. For example, we observed staff get a blanket for a person when they said they were cold. And staff asked a person discreetly if they needed the toilet.

People and relatives said they were treated with kindness, compassion and dignity.

Relatives said, “I would say they’re brilliant (the staff). They are very polite and look after [Relative’s] needs. They make sure [Relative] is comfortable and happy. Not rude. They show manners and respect.”And another relative said, “If they (staff) need to work together then they work as a team. Like in the communal lounge. If someone (a carer) is struggling, then other staff come and support them. They invited us to come as a family on [relative’s] birthday.”

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.

In the last assessment we found the provider did not always treat people as individuals. In this assessment we saw the provider had included information about what is important to people in their care plans. For example, information was in place about people’s religious and spiritual needs. Staff we spoke with were aware of people’s needs and preferences and relatives felt staff knew their relative well. One relative said, “I think they (staff) are quite caring and take pride in their work. They know [Relative] quite well. They asked me questions about [Relative’s] past.”

People’s rooms were personalised and specialist equipment was in place to support people’s individual needs.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. In the last assessment the provider did not always promote people’s independence. People’s personal hygiene plans did not include information about what people could do for themselves and which areas of personal hygiene they needed staff support for.

In this assessment we found care plans informed staff how much people were able to do for themselves and when they needed staff support. Care plans included information about people’s preferences and abilities, including any aspects of their care they could do for themselves. For example, care plans detailed which aspects of personal hygiene people could manage themselves and when they might need staff support. Oral health plans included information on whether people were able to clean their teeth themselves. However, we saw some examples of oral care records where staff had documented the person had been offered oral care but had declined. In these cases, there was not always records to show that staff had gone back and offered support at a different time.

One staff member gave an example of how they supported a person to maintain their independence. They told us, “I asked the person how they would like to be helped with their personal care. They said they would like to do this themselves, so I stayed nearby to offer support if they needed it.”

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.

In the last assessment we found staff did not always respond to people’s needs in a timely way.

In this assessment we saw improvements had been made. Records showed staff used a nationally recognised tool to assess people’s clinical condition if they had concerns about their wellbeing. The tool supported staff in knowing when to escalate concerns about people’s health. We saw that staff monitored people’s clinical condition on a monthly basis to keep an up-to-date record of people’s clinical baseline observations.

Most relatives said staff responded quickly to call bells and records showed the provider was auditing call bell response time and had not identified any issues with staff response time.

Staff could explain the actions they would take in the event of a person becoming unwell or distressed.

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

In the last assessment we found staff morale was low and staff reported a lack of leadership.

In this inspection staff told us morale had improved. One staff member said, “I think the home has improved a lot, staff morale has gone up, and we have a manager now, who is hands on.” Staff told us they were now receiving regular supervisions and having team meetings.

The provider said that staff were able to take breaks when needed and were offered meals during their shifts. Staff were also given flexibility to attend to personal appointments, where possible, while still ensuring the needs of the service were met. The manager described having an open-door approach, saying that staff were encouraged to speak with them at any time.