South Street

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.At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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, or respect their privacy and dignity. Relatives had mixed views about staff and their approach. A relative told us when asked if staff were kind, “oh yes, definitely, they are beautifully looked after and turned out when they go out. It’s a lovely place.’’ Whilst another relative told us, “Some of the staff can be a bit abrupt. Sometimes they are treated with dignity but not all the time.” Our observations showed staff were sometimes task focussed and did not always spend their time communicating with people. During the inspection we saw a staff member was sitting in the lounge at the table where people were sitting and they did not engage in any conversation with people. On another occasion we observed a person was almost going to spill their drink, a staff member came along and abruptly took the cup from the person’s hands without any explanation or pausing to see if the person was ok. This meant improvements were needed to staff practice. However, people told us the staff were nice and kind. A person said, “Yes, they are all kind to me they listen to me when I talk about something.”

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. Relatives felt the lack of staff sometimes prevented people from doing things they individually enjoyed and gave examples of where they didn’t feel people always had a choice. A relative told us, “[Person’s name] likes going out, what they have said is if they stop in, they get bored, they don’t like stopping in.” The relative went on to say, “What [person’s name] says to me is its chicken every Sunday and sometimes they say they are fed up of having chicken every Sunday.” Another relative told us, “[Person’s name] isn’t religious, but they go to church for an outing as they like going out.” People had individual care plans in place; however, staff were sometimes unclear on what these included and were observed not always following the plans. Records showed where people had individualised plans which included accessing the community, these were not always followed. This meant care was not consistently person-centred or tailored to individual needs and interests of individuals. There were limited opportunities for meaningful engagement in activities of peoples choosing. Improvements were needed to ensure people had their individual needs and preferences considered. However, people told us they were able to personalise their own space in the home and got to do things they enjoyed. A person told us, “I like my room. I am happy here.” Another person told us, “I go out and have breakfast.”

The provider promoted people’s independence; however, people did not consistently have choice and control over their own care. Relatives told us they did not always feel people were able to make choices about how they spent their time. Most relatives told us people could not access the community and do things they enjoyed. A relative told us some activities which the person had enjoyed prior to coming to the home were no longer offered to the person and they missed these. We saw staff did not consistently offer people choices at mealtimes. For example, a person was given their breakfast without being offered a choice, the person said they didn’t want it. Staff then asked them what they did want to eat and the person expressed their preference. Whilst some people were offered choices, inadequate staffing levels impacted on the ability of staff to offer activity provision which met people’s individual preferences. Improvements were needed to enable people to consistently exercise independence and control over their daily lives. However, people were able to independently access their bedrooms, communal areas and some were able to access the kitchen and make drinks for themselves.

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 were not consistently supported to have their needs met when they required support. Staff told us the lack of available staff often meant people had to be asked to wait. We saw staff had to tell a person they needed to wait before being able to go out into the community. We saw another person was asked to wait when they wanted to get dressed. This meant people did not always receive the care and supported they needed when they needed it and improvements were needed to enable staff to respond effectively to people’s needs.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff, however, staff were not consistently supported and enabled to deliver person-centred care. Staff all told us there was insufficient staff available to enable them to provide the person-centred care people needed. Staff gave examples of how people were unable to access the community and do things they enjoyed as there was not enough staff to support them safely. Staff told us a lack of funding meant they were unable to have additional staff to support people. Staff described doing the best they could to support people with the resources available. However, staff told us there were systems in place to ensure their wellbeing was considered. A staff member told us, “We have got access to a healthcare app and access to benefits and some things to help us like counselling.” Staff said they had regular supervision meetings and were able to discuss their role and any personal issues they needed support with.