Manor Barn Nursing 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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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 person centred care.

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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity.

People told us staff were kind and caring, one person told us, “I get on well with the staff.” A relative said, “Staff are caring, considerate and seem genuinely interested in the residents.”

Staff spoke positively about people. The registered manager spoke with compassion about one person and told us how staff enjoyed supporting them. They told us, “They are the soul of the building.” We observed staff interacting with people in a kind and caring way. A staff member spoke with people about the food choices on offer, their approach was respectful, patient and supported people’s dignity.

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Some care plans lacked detail and did not always provide guidance for staff in how to meet individual needs and preferences.

People’s choices and preferences were not always clearly noted including their interests or hobbies. Although a person’s preference for watching TV was noted their preferred programmes were not included. Another person liked listening to music but their preferred style of music was not clear. Some people’s religious needs were noted but there was no detail included to guide staff in how to support them. This did not support staff to provide a personalised service for people. Staff told us care plans were in the process of being improved to include more detail.

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People were positive about how well staff supported independence. One relative said, “Staff are very proactive in helping to ensure (person’s name) remains as independent and comfortable as possible.” A person told us how they were able to remain self-caring in some aspects of their care. They said, “I am in control of it, I tell them (staff) what to do.” However, not everyone was supported to remain independent or to improve their independence. A person with a learning disability was not leading a full and active life. Their care plan included limited opportunities for maintaining or developing skills but this was not being supported by staff. Following this assessment the provider confirmed they would work with the local authority to review the person’s needs.

Staff did not always respond to people’s needs or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress in a timely manner. Some people required support to drink fluids to prevent dehydration. We observed that drinks were left out of reach for some people and saw staff did not return to support them to have their drinks for more than 25 minutes by which time the hot drinks were becoming cold. The inspector brought this to the attention of the nurse on duty who took immediate action to address the concerns found. Following this assessment the registered manager provided evidence of new arrangements to ensure staff were allocated to support people with drinks when needed. People told us staff were responsive to their needs and acted quickly if they needed support. One person said, “I’ve only called once when I fell, three of them came, all very fast.” A relative described staff as being responsive and said, “I have always been confident that (person’s name) is safe, happy and very well cared for.”

The provider promoted the wellbeing of their staff and this supported a positive culture within the service.

Staff described improvements made by the new provider. One staff member told us, “Everything has changed, lots of things are being done differently.” They gave an example explaining how daily checks to support administration of medicines had a positive impact by reducing the number of mistakes. They described how this supported staff to feel less pressured and more confident saying, “Any mistakes can be rectified straight away.”

The registered manager described how improvements had been made following a staff survey. They explained measures were introduced to provide staff with more consistent support. This included regular team meetings, a daily “huddle” meeting and regular supervision meetings to identify individual support needs. The registered manager explained how these changes were beginning to have a positive impact improving staff well being and morale.