Lakeside Court ECS

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. 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 70 (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 treated people with kindness and compassion and maintained their dignity when providing care and support. A person said, “The carers are very kind, caring and compassionate.” Staff explained they were careful to respect and maintain people’s privacy and dignity. A staff member said, “You assess the situation. I know the boundaries. I’m always respectful, as we are entering their home.” Professionals confirmed there was a culture of kindness, both towards people supported by the service and towards professionals from other organisations. A professional commented, “Yes. Staff seem consistently kind, caring, and respectful."

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’s care records contained information about their personal history, preferences and any cultural and religious needs. Staff shared examples of building meaningful relationships with people they supported, including learning about individual preferences and communication styles. One staff member said, “[Persons] excited to see me, she lights up. I’ve learnt to really listen to understand her.”

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. Staff promoted people’s independence, ensuring they had choice and control over their care, treatment and wellbeing. For example, people were supported to manage their own medicines, and staff told us how they encouraged people to make everyday choices in relation to food and clothing. A person commented, “They are supportive about my food decision.” A relative said, “I have no complaints. The staff are very responsive.” Care records included information about people’s routines and daily activities. People received support to join on‑site activities organised by the residents committee or housing provider, including coffee mornings and exercise sessions. People also received support to access the local community when this formed part of their support package.

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. Staff were alert to people’s changing needs and recognised when individuals required additional support. People and their relatives told us the service responded positively and engaged in discussions about people’s changing needs as necessary. A person commented, “They have provided a bit of extra support as I felt a bit wobbly after my fall.” A relative said, “The company has really stepped up to provide extra care for person. This was not in the original care plan, but adjustments were made at once. They were excellent to squeeze in more provision.”

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. The provider had processes to support and promote staff wellbeing; however, these were not completed in a consistent way. Records showed several staff members had been working without a day off over the previous month.The provider explained they scheduled shifts in advance to ensure staff received regular rest days; however, staff had agreed to take on extra shifts at short notice to maintain cover during a staffing shortage. Some staff told us they did not take their full break, as they needed to respond to call bells. Processes intended to support staff and enable feedback were not completed consistently, including supervisions, appraisals, and team meetings. Staff told us the staffing shortage had been challenging; however, most felt supported. The provider informed us about other initiatives available to support staff, including a wellbeing guide and awards recognising staff achievements. The provider told us the staffing arrangements had been time limited and did not represent their normal practice. Following the assessment, we were informed appropriate rest days for staff had now resumed as staffing levels improved.