CJ Noah Healthcare

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 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 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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity.

One person said, “I have found [staff] to be kind, compassionate, patient and caring”. Another person told us “I have found [staff] to be polite, friendly and we can have some really good chats.”

A staff member said, “We protect people’s privacy, so all the doors and blinds are closed so they are not exposed.”

The registered manager told us “All the staff have to have training and understand the requirements and concepts of dignity and kindness from the organisation’s vision”.

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.

Care plans did not always include information about people’s personal, cultural, social or religious needs. They did not always include preferences or information about people’s communication needs.

Daily records were mostly task focused and didn’t always evidence staff respected people’s choices and preferences.

However, we saw some evidence the staff team shared information about people’s meal preferences and routines.

People had positive relationships with staff. One person said, “I have got to know them very well and they have got to know me well too.” Another said “They take their time with me; we go at a gentle amble and that suits me.”

One staff member said, “We maintain people’s privacy, property, peace, understand their space, know how to talk to them and understand their conditions and unique needs, basically them feeling heard and in control, they have to be in charge.”

The provider ensured people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

One person told us, “I never feel they are rushed, they take their time with me, and they are very kind and understanding.” Another told us, “They have been very helpful, they ask if there is anything else I need help with.”

Staff explained the importance of respecting people’s choices. One staff member told us, “We respect when [people] want to make their own decisions, for example, if they want a certain type of clothes, we follow their preferences, promote their independence, make sure they do what they are able to on their own”.

The provider did not always understand people’s needs. Care plans did not include information to guide staff as to how to support someone in an emergency. For example, for people with serious conditions that may need urgent medical support there was no information about signs and symptoms staff should be aware of.

However, there was evidence that following an incident appropriate action was taken to minimise their discomfort, concern and distress.

The provider did not always support or enable staff to deliver person-centred care. Staff workloads were too high and didn’t support their wellbeing. Some people’s care calls could not be provided in line with their care plans due to the lack of staff. The provider was addressing the need for more staff, and the registered manager was providing care to people.
The provider did not have a system in place to ensure that training and supervision was carried out at appropriate intervals as per their policy.
However, staff told us they felt valued, and their good work was recognised. Staff told us they had opportunities to share their views and opinions and felt they were listened to.