Hawthorne Nursing 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 service under the current provider. This key question has been rated good.

This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 65 (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 dignity.

We observed mixed interactions from staff. We observed some good interactions and staff supporting people with activities however, we also observed some staff interactions lacked communication. Although people were supported to maintain their dignity, we observed people being expected to drink from cups with excessive staining and jugs with debris on top was undignified. This could potentially result in the person feeling embarrassed, undervalued or degraded. We observed staff not explaining their actions to a person during moving and handling, this leading to distress from the person being lifted. People gave us generally positive feedback around staff being kind and caring. The service had dignity champions in place.

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.

People were offered choice inday‑to‑dayaspects of their care, such as whattowear and what to eat, and relatives told inspectors staff often knew people well and responded to concerns when raised. Some staffdemonstratedpersonalised approaches and respectful interactions, supporting people’s dignity.People’s care and support plans reflected their personal,socialand cultural needs. For example,1person wished to attend church was offered these opportunities.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People were supported to make day‑to‑day choices about their care, including choices about what to wear, what to eat and drink, and how to spend their time. Inspectors observed staff offering people options and responding when people asked for support, which helped promote independence and control in everyday decisions. Where people required support to make decisions, staff used communication approaches to help them understand their choices. We observed people were offered to join in with the afternoon activity on the day of inspection. Care plans included some information about people’s routines and day-to-day choices, but they did not consistently set out how people were supported to maintain or maximise their independence.

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.

We observed staff supporting people to ensure their immediate needs were met in a timely way. Staff responded to call bells in a timely manner during the onsite inspection and staff were visible in communal areas to support and monitor people’s needs. People and relatives reported staff responded to concerns when these were raised. However, some people stated they experienced delays at busy times.

The provider did not always care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff. They did not always support or enable staff to deliver person-centred care.

We received mixed feedback about staff wellbeing and support. While staff had access to staff meetings and supervisions, we noted staff meeting records did not always reflect a consistently supportive or positive culture. The service had experienced a period of instability, with several changes in management over a short time, which staff said had been disruptive and affected morale and consistency. However, on the second day of inspection, more recent leadership arrangements were described as more approachable and supportive, and staff told us they felt able to seek help and raise concerns when needed.