Ridgeway Court Care 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 new provider. 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 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 did not always treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion, or respect their privacy and dignity.

Systems to assess, monitor and mitigate risks to people, including risks associated with the environment did not always demonstrate a caring approach. Audits were not always effective and timely action was not always taken to address issues we found during this assessment. Although a refurbishment plan was in place some people currently lived in bedrooms, which were not dignified due to wear and tear, odour and damaged flooring.

People, relatives and healthcare professionals told us staff treated people kindly and respectfully. One person told us, “The staff are great and they are kind and very respectful, we have a laugh.” A relative said, “The staff are fantastic.” We observed staff interacting with people in a caring and kind manner. Staff protected people’s privacy and dignity. They ensured people received assistance with personal hygiene behind closed doors. A person told us, “Staff support me to have a shower, they always respect my dignity, giving me a towel to cover up and so on.”

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.

Staff knew people well and understood how they preferred their care to be provided. However, some people’s care plans lacked detail about their life histories, some medical needs, cultural backgrounds, and how these might affect individual preferences and needs. People’s holistic needs were not always considered and planned for in respect to their disabilities and mental health needs. Meaningful pastimes were not always provided to people who were unable to participate in group activities, or people with cognitive or sensory needs. This meant some people were at risk of being isolated and without meaningful activities to occupy their time. A person told us, “It can be lonely sometimes, there are not many people here to speak to, not much to do, so I enjoy it when staff have some time to chat with me.”

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

People were not always given choice and control about their care. For example, as previously stated people with sensor mats in their bedrooms had not routinely been asked about the frequency, they would like these to be checked at night to minimise the risk of people being disturbed when they were sleeping.However, we did see evidence people were given choices about daily routines, meals and personal care.

The manager and staff were aware of the importance of encouraging people’s independence. They promoted independence with eating and drinking by providing equipment where needed, such as plate guards and suitable cups and beakers, enabling people to eat and drink without assistance. People who were able to, were supported to continue to go out to places they enjoyed either by themselves, with friends and family or sometimes with staff support.

Relatives confirmed they were able to visit whenever it suited their family member and themselves.

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.

Where possible staff responded to people’s immediate needs. For example, placing pillows or cushions to help them sit comfortably, or providing emotional support when people may have been anxious. One person said, “When I use my call bell the staff usually come quickly, unless they are really busy.”

However, we did observe occasions where people were kindly asked to wait as staff were busy supporting other people. This included when a person requested to use the toilet and when someone requested a drink. Staff did return in a timely manner to support people.

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

This provider told us since taking over the home they had aimed to support the staff to provide effective care. The provider told us they had made several changes to make things easier for staff such as introducing an electronic recording system. Further plans and changes were due to be implemented as part of an ongoing improvement programme that was in place. The provider said they aimed to introduce staff wellbeing schemes soon.

Staff told us the morale had been impacted by changes in the provider, management team, and recent changes with the staff team. Most staff however said things were getting better and they felt supported by the new management team. Most staff were positive about the new structures being implemented. Staff told us they had access to supervision and attended staff meetings. Staff were encouraged to give feedback through annual staff surveys. Staff told us they supported each other and communication was improving across the team.