Regency Hall

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good.

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.

We did not look at Kindness, compassion and dignity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

People told us their choices were respected, and relatives said staff knew their family members well, including their preferences and routines. This helped ensure care was delivered in a personalised and meaningful way.

People were supported in a way that recognised their individuality. Care plans reflected their likes, dislikes and personal preferences, helping staff understand what was important to each person. Communication care plans were in place and detailed how people preferred to communicate, including their chosen language, ensuring staff could engage with them in a way that suited their needs.

People were supported to make day‑to‑day choices about their care. They were involved in decisions such as what they wanted to wear, whether they preferred a bath or shower, and whether they wished to be supported by male or female staff. People also continued to maintain relationships that were important to them, with regular visits from family and friends.

Activities were available throughout the day, and a new gardening club had recently been introduced. People and relatives told us that activities had improved since a new activity staff member had started, and people were mostly spending more time out of their rooms. This helped promote people’s independence, engagement and overall wellbeing.

People told us their needs were not always met in a timely way, including having to wait when using their call bell. Staff also reported that they sometimes felt rushed, which meant they could not always provide support at the required times, such as repositioning people during the night. Leaders did not have oversight of call‑bell response times, limiting their ability to identify delays or take action.

However, during the inspection we observed staff responding promptly when call bells sounded, and we saw staff act quickly when people showed signs of being unwell. This demonstrated that, while systems and oversight were lacking, staff were attentive and responsive in the moment.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.