Maids Moreton 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 Outstanding. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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.

We observed staff providing empathetic, compassionate care, with gentle interactions during care tasks. People consistently told us they were treated kindly by staff. Comments included, “I am well looked after here and everyone is kind,” “Mostly, they are respectful” and “The staff are very good, and all quite nice. They are never rough or shout at me.”

Professionals confirmed people were treated well. One professional told us, “The staff that work at Maids Moreton are all genuinely lovely people. If I needed to have a family member in care this would be my first option.”

People’s relatives provided mixed feedback. Comments included, “The carers all seem nice, they help [person] and are very kind,” “I am afraid [staff] don’t bother with [Person] as [they] don’t complain,” and “Some staff are very nice, and some can be quite rude. It’s very variable, you never know how it will be.”

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 supported to express their wishes, aspirations and goals through a ‘wishing tree’, which reflected what was important to them, including personal and culturally significant wishes. The registered manager shared an example where 2 people expressed a wish to visit Wimbledon. Staff supported them to achieve this, including arranging a private tour of the grounds. This demonstrated how staff used people’s individual wishes and aspirations to provide meaningful experiences and support people to achieve outcomes that were important to them.

People were supported by staff who knew their routines, backgrounds, their abilities and strengths. Care plans held specific information about people’s daily routines, including when they liked to get up, and where they liked to eat. Records also confirmed people’s typical mood and presentation, meaning staff could support people who had difficulty communicating pain or 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.

People were not always supported to make informed choices about food and drink. People were not consistently shown available meal options, and we observed staff verbally offering choices of meals that were not available. A staff member described a previous occasion where a fish dish had been incorrectly described as pork. This meant people were not always enabled to make informed choices over meals.

Staff interactions with people were predominantly task focused. We observed people spending prolonged periods in communal areas without meaningful interaction from staff or managers, which was consistent with the provider’s own observations. Relatives also told us people could spend extended periods in their rooms without engagement. As a result, opportunities to support people’s social and emotional wellbeing through meaningful interaction were not always taken. We gave feedback to the provider, and they took action to organise training for staff.

However, staff responded positively to people’s requests and knew their individual choices and preferences. We observed staff supporting people to make choices about where they sat and how they spent their time. People also told us their preferences regarding the gender of staff providing personal care were respected. This supported people to have some choice and control over their daily lives.

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 responded to people’s distress promptly, calmly and with compassion. Staff were trained to support people with behaviours that communicated an emotion or distress, using both verbal and physical reassurance to minimise these. A staff member shared an example of a person who does not like crowds which impacted their engagement in activities. The staff member told us, “When we had a barbecue, we left through the side door and observed from a distance, so they could still experience it.”

A professional told us, “I particularly notice [during healthcare treatment] when residents may be anxious, confused or require additional reassurance. Staff are supportive and familiar with the individual resident, which can make treatment considerably easier and less stressful for them.”

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff, and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff told us they felt supported by the management team within the home. Comments included, “[Quality Manager] is very supportive, [they] always ask us if we need a hand”, “We always work well as a team to support one another” and “[Registered manager] and [Deputy Manager] are very supportive, and very calm. They help as much as they can.” Staff confirmed they had access to an Employee Assistance Programme (EAP) which could be used when they needed support for their wellbeing.