Blossom Lodge

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.

This service scored 50 (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. People and relatives gave us positive feedback about staff kindness and how they were treated. However, some people told us they often had to wait for staff to support them, and some people told us they had to wait for a drink. A person said, “I am happy here, I wouldn’t change anything. The staff are fine.” Whilst another person said, “We go for hours without a drink, and they (staff) don’t bring soft drinks, just hot drinks.” We observed staff rushing due to staffing shortages, which impacted the consistency of compassionate, timely and dignified care.

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. We could not be assured people were treated as individuals. Staff did not always know people’s needs well. For example, staff told us conflicting information about a person’s repositioning schedules and choking risks. We observed staff to be task focused, having little time to provide meaningful interactions with people. A person told us, “Staff seem rushed, but I haven’t experienced anything I shouldn’t have.” A relative said, “Seem to be enough staff, we could wish for more. The care is good.”

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 not always supported to make choices. For example, menu boards were not completed, and not all people could access this information. Clocks showing incorrect times also impacted people living with dementia in orientating themselves to the time of day. However, we observed staff to be kind and offering people a choice of meals and drinks.

The provider did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. People did not always receive timely support. For example, people requiring assistance at mealtimes or with toileting experienced delays due to staff availability. People told us they often had to wait for staff support. There was a lack of snacks and drinks available to people without staff support. This did not promote nutritional and fluid intake for people. A staff member said, “We don’t have enough time, people who need help with feeding have to wait. We have a lot of people who need help with food and drinks.”

The provider did not always care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff. They did not always support or enable staff to deliver person-centred care. Staff were not fully supported. For example, some staff reported they had never received supervision, and staff surveys were not confidential, meaning staff may not feel able to raise concerns openly. We received mixed feedback from staff, some staff told us they had raised concerns, particularly regarding staffing and had not been listened to. There was also a lack of staff initiatives in place to enable staff to feel valued.