The Willow

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

This service scored 80 (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 was exceptional at treating people with kindness, empathy and compassion and in how they respected people’s privacy and dignity. Staff always treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

We observed all staff greeting people and ask after their wellbeing throughout the day of the inspection. Staff always knocked on people’s doors before entering bedrooms. Staff were always discreet when offering support to people, respected their dignity and people’s choices even when they appeared to be “unwise”.

Every interaction witnessed was kind, caring, and positive. Staff encouraged residents to get to know each other and to eat together around a large dining table. We observed staff engaging regularly with a new resident and asking them about their life history, their wishes and preferences for activities, music and food.

People told us that “staff are wonderful” and “the staff are so lovely, they help me do things”. Relatives told us “All the staff are welcoming and seem pleased to see us when we call in” and “Right from the start, the staff have been nothing but kind, courteous, patient, they put their residents first.”

Partners told us that “Everyone seems treated with kindness and respect” and “the environment felt welcoming and respectful”. Partners who responded to our request for feedback all told us they themselves were treated professionally with kindness and respect by the service.

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

Families told us they were asked to create life histories with their relatives “a kind of book of key things that are important for [person]”. Management and staff knew people very well and told us they ask people which foods they like to eat, and “how they like to be washed”, and what activities they would like to undertake. The home is currently being refurbished, and people have been able to choose what colour their bedrooms are. This meant people’s individual needs and preferences were understood.

We observed people’s care records reflecting that some people preferred to eat at different times of day to others, and observed people being given alcohol with their meals. People told us “I have a glass of white wine with my lunch every day, I have done for years”.

A regular church service took place at the home, and the service had a good relationship with the reverend. This meant that people’s religious needs were met.

Partners told us they felt people were treated as individuals. People’s representatives told us “[person] is a very quirky character, and they treat him very well.”

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Staff worked in a person-centred way to enable people to access a wide range of activities which reflected their preferences, wishes and aspirations. People chose activities to take place at the home. We saw evidence of monthly planners for activities. People told us “I have fun here, and I have friends”.

People were encouraged to make day to day decisions. Care plans detailed how people liked to dress, how and when they preferred to have their meals. Where people were unable to make these decisions, staff had got to know people well and were able to present informed choices to support people in making those decisions.

People’s relatives told us “My [relative] is a bit of a recluse, always has been, but [they] communicate more now than ever before.”

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. We observed staff acting on people’s requests for support immediately and responding to discomfort with care and concern. People’s representatives told us “I’ve seen [staff] sitting with other residents who seem to be upset.”

On the day of the inspection, a persons’ health needs changed. We saw handover meetings recorded this change and the team worked together to change the care provided accordingly, including speaking to external partners. We observed staff giving end of life care in a calm, kind, way.

People’s relatives told us “As [name] moves closer to the end of [their] life, I don’t think [they] could be in a better place, [the staff] are all invariably kind, compassionate and respectful.”

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff, supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. Staff told us they felt well supported in their roles, “I like working here actually. I always feel welcomed, and staff are lovely. It’s a lovely home to work in” and the provider had "increased face to face training which they feltwere more beneficial to them and all staff”. Staff also told us they receive “support to carry out their role.”

Staff were offered regular opportunities to provide feedback, raise concerns and suggest ways to improve the service or staff experiences.

The service had developed an internal award scheme for staff. This meant staff who had gone the extra mile in their work supporting people were recognised for their achievements.