Silverleigh Cedars

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 remained 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.

Staff had a patient, and compassionate approach to people, and it was clear from observing staff engagement they knew people well and were focused on people’s happiness and well-being. We observed gentle and respectful interactions between staff and people at the service. Staff were tactile and reassuring if people were distressed. Staff responded to people’s requests in a timely way and showed patience and understanding when some people repeated questions several times.

People and their relatives were positive about the caring attitude of the staff team. Staff were described as kind, friendly and caring. Comments from people included, “The staff are lovely, all of them. I really couldn't complain about them” and “They (staff) look after me. We are all friends here”. Relatives told us, “They (staff) are brilliant and happy. They can’t do more for you” and “The staff are great. They are engaging and friendly”.

Visiting professionals said they were always welcome at the service and there was always a staff member to speak with. Comments included, “Whenever I have visited the home I have been received with politeness and extreme efficiency. I have always had a warm welcome from all the staff”.

Relatives confirmed they felt welcome at the service and there were unrestricted visiting hours, which enabled them to maintain relationships with their family member. One relative said, “All staff are very good, courteous and friendly, and always call me by name”.

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.

Care plans were personalised to ensure staff had the information they needed to provide care and support to meet people’s needs and preferences. People were supported by staff who knew them well. Staff used people’s names in conversation and acknowledged people as they moved around the service, stopping to say hello or ask how they were.

People were able to follow their own routines and staff respected people’s different lifestyle choices. One person said, “They (staff) know my routines. They help me with my equipment and do things my way”.People were supported to practice their religion and attend places of worship. Some people were supported to attend external clubs and activities that interested them. People’s bedrooms reflected their individuality and were personalised.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and well being.Staff supported people to be as independent as possible. Equipment and support aids were available to help people maximise independence and participate in daily tasks safely. We observed staff reminding people to use walking frames and sticks throughout the day, to promote their independence and safety.People had access to various professionals to promote their independence, for example occupational therapists and physiotherapists.People were offered daily choices around food, drink and activities. They were involved in making decisions within the service, including changes to the menu, activities offered and changes to the environment.

People were supported to take part in a range of activities and there was a programme of activities and events planned. Activities were organised daily and included music and movement; sensory sessions, arts and crafts and external entertainers. People were also supported and encourage to attend events and clubs in the local community.

The activities were led by a trained and enthusiastic member of staff. However, we heard concerns that the number of activity staff had been reduced meaning there had been a decline in the activities on offer. The number of activity staff on duty varied from 1 to 3. 2 relatives told us there were not as many activities as in the past. Several people spent time in their private rooms. The activities lead explained they were offered 3 visits a week by activity staff to ensure they were not socially isolated. People were supported to maintain relationships with family and friends. During our assessment, we observed a welcoming environment with many visitors present.

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.On the whole staff responded promptly to people’s requests for assistance and were able to respond quickly to people to minimise any upset or distress. Staff appeared alert to the people’s needs and call bells were dealt with quickly. A relative told us, “I have been very impressed. It’s a homely place and a nice atmosphere”.Another relative told us about the quick actions taken by nursing and care staff when their family member suddenly fell ill. They said, “I am eternally grateful to them”.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff. Additional work was being undertaken to ensure consistent support for all staff to enable them to continue to deliver person-centred care.We received mixed feedback from staff. Staff did not feel consistently supported or valued.Several staff shared frustrations and concerns about the provider changes at the service including staffing issues, perceived preferential treatment and the lack of communication about changes. Some staff described morale as low. Two staff members told us the changes had been difficult. One added, “We do need to adapt”. Another said, “Some staff are negative and putting us down that's hard. We need to work together”.

The new provider’s management team, including a director, visited the service regularly, offering support to the registered manager and team during the transition. The director and registered manager explained staff had found some of the recent changes challenging. The provider had set up confidential meetings for staff to feedback any concerns. However, 2 staff members said they had spoken up about concerns but hadn’t had any feedback from the provider. This was discussed with the director to address.

As a part of the providers quality assurance processes, staff were provided with regular opportunities to provide feedback, raise concerns, and suggest ways to improve the service. Regular staff meetings and supervision were held to promote better communication and share updates about changes. The director was keen to establish an open culture to promote better team collaboration, inclusivenessand well being, helping staff to feel valued.