Emmanuel House Care 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. 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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

The provider always treated people with kindness, compassion and dignity. People, relatives and staff provided consistently positive feedback about the caring nature of staff, and inspectors observed respectful interactions including reassurance during transfers, medicines support and conversations with people.

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.

The provider always treated people as individuals. Care records contained personalised information about people's life histories, preferences, routines and wishes, and staff demonstrated a good understanding of people's individual needs and preferences. Records showed staff used person-centred approaches, such as music, reassurance, family photographs and meaningful occupations to support people experiencing distress.

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

The provider did not always promote and support people's independence, choice and control. There was evidence of people being offered choices around meals, drinks, routines and preferred places to spend their time, and care records contained guidance to support people to remain as independent as possible. However, observations identified some people remained seated in communal areas for prolonged periods with limited engagement, and questions were raised regarding opportunities for repositioning and meaningful occupation. Some people and relatives also reported delays in receiving support, which could affect people's ability to exercise choice and control when they needed assistance.

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.

Staff always responded to people’s immediate needs. Relatives described staff as proactive and responsive, with one relative telling us, “They are very keen and proactive in taking action when needed.” Inspectors observed staff providing attentive support during mealtimes, offering people choices and responding to requests for assistance, and care records demonstrated prompt action when people's needs changed, including referrals to health professionals and reviews of support arrangements. Whilst some people and relatives reported delays in call bell responses at busier times, the overall evidence demonstrated staff recognised and took appropriate action to support people's immediate needs.

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.

The provider did not always support workforce wellbeing and enablement. Staff spoke positively about teamworking and described the registered and deputy managers as supportive, with one member of staff saying, “Managers are so supportive.” However, staff consistently identified the impact of staffing shortages, sickness absence and difficulties filling shifts. Staff reported low morale associated with being short staffed, infrequent staff meetings, lack of staff recognition and concerns regarding the timing of wage payments during the contractual payday. These issues negatively affected staff wellbeing.