Bennett 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. This is the first assessment for this service since it changed provider in September 2023. This key question has been rated 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.

People and their relatives told us staff were kind, caring and respectful. One person said, “The staff are all lovely and they look after me well. They are very kind.” Another person told us, “The staff are nice kind people.” A relative said, “I couldn’t be happier. The carers are marvellous. They are so kind and caring and couldn’t do more.” A health care professional told us, “Staff are caring and compassionate in their approach. They appear to know patients well and provide person centred care. There have been several changes in staff but more recent ones we have experienced seem more caring and compassionate. They also seem responsive to the patients/ clients.” People responded positively when staff interacted with them. For example, with a smile or hug. A relative told us, “[Person’s] face beams when they see the staff and that’s very telling.”
 

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 were treated as individuals and their preferences, choices, and personal histories were respected. Care records showed people’s likes, dislikes, routines, and life experiences were documented and used to inform care delivery. Staff knew people well and we heard them chatting with people about their life experiences and family members. Staff supported people’s religious and cultural needs, respecting their beliefs and practices. People were supported to have their personal possessions around them and outside their bedrooms there was a memory box to display personalised items and photographs.
 

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 maintain their independence and make choices about their care and daily lives. Records showed people’s preferences and levels of independence were clearly documented and reflected in their care plans. We observed staff offering choices in a respectful and unhurried way, enabling people to make decisions about their routines, meals, and activities. Staff adapted their approach to support people’s communication needs, ensuring everyone could express their views. Risk assessments were in place to support people to take positive risks while maintaining their safety. These included mobilising and eating and drinking. Records showed these were regularly reviewed and balanced people’s rights with appropriate safeguards.
 

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.

People’s immediate needs were responded to promptly and appropriately. We observed staff were attentive and responsive, providing support without unnecessary delay when people required assistance. A relative told us, “The care is really good. Staff know how to handle [relative] if they are upset and they know exactly what to do.” Another relative said, “The staff are very quick at responding to changes in [relative’s] health. They phone me when [relative] is restless and say it may be a urine infection. They contact the GP straight away because they know [relative] and are straight on it.” Records showed systems were in place to monitor people’s needs, including call systems and regular checks, which helped ensure timely responses. Staff demonstrated an awareness of people who required closer observation or more urgent support. We observed staff responding quickly to requests for assistance, such as support with personal care, mobility, or emotional reassurance. People appeared comfortable seeking help, and staff provided this in a calm and respectful manner.
 

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

We observed a kind and respectful culture among staff, with team members supporting one another and working collaboratively. This contributed to a calm and caring environment for people using the service. However, some staff told us senior care staff did not always support them consistently. We discussed this with the registered manager who was aware of the issue and was in the process of implementing new systems. Records showed staff received regular supervision, training, and opportunities to reflect on their practice. Staff told us this helped them feel confident in their roles and better able to meet people’s individual needs. Staff also told us the registered manager had made reasonable adjustments to their role where required. An example of this was changing shift patterns to accommodate childcare arrangements.