Housing 21 - The Watermill

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.

People spoke positive about how they were supported by staff. One person said, “I get on great with the staff, they are all very nice. I feel cared for. There’s always staff around to help you. They are there when you need them. They treat us all alright.” Relatives reflected similar views. One relative told us, “The staff are very considerate. They suggested that [person] wears trousers now as it’s more dignified when she is in the hoist.” Another relative commented, “The staff are all wonderful. They are caring and kind, they genuinely care about people.”

Staff shared examples with us of how they supported people in a dignified way. One staff member said, “I make sure curtains and doors are shut. You put a towel around what you aren’t washing so they are covered up a bit.” We observed staff supporting people throughout the day and found they did this with patience and compassion.

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.

Relatives were confident staff knew their family members and were treated as individuals. One relative said, “The staff know him well, all his history of being in the army, and all his likes and dislikes.” Another relative said, “The staff are outstanding. They know her so well. They bring out the best of her and her sense of humour; she likes a laugh and a joke with them. They spend time talking to her.”

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s needs and preferences. They knew people’s life histories and used people’s experiences as way of relating to them and calming them in times of distress. For example, we observed 1 person who was distressed being supported by staff to look at photographs of those important to them, and in discussing this, the person gradually became less anxious.

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

People told us they made their own decisions about how they lived their daily lives. Relatives supported this view, 1 relative said, “Staff leave [person] to make his own decisions about when to get up etc.”

We observed staff offered people choices throughout the day, including whether they required support with mobility, personal care, and decisions about where they spent their time. This promoted people’s own decision making and staff were respectful of people’s choices.

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.

People and relatives told us staff were responsive. One relative told us, “There is an alarm on the floor next to the bed. This is to protect [person] and they know if she is out of bed. There is always staff around.” Another relative said, “They check on him all of the time. He is fed and watered well. They have brought him out of himself more. He’s happy.”

Where people required assistance, we saw staff were available and supported people with eating, drinking and their mobility.

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

Feedback about how staff felt they were supported was mixed. Some staff members felt there was a lack of equity across the staff team and that their wellbeing was not always considered. One staff member said, “I think the staff rotas don’t always give staff enough time off between shifts. Staff are tired.” We discussed this feedback with the registered manager who acknowledged staff concerns. They told us they would discuss with senior staff and consider how information about decision making could be shared more widely with the staff team. We will check this at our next inspection.

Other staff spoke more positively about their experience. One staff member commented, “We get check ins every 3 months and we are asked about how we are and if we have everything to do [for] our job or if there is any safeguarding issues. [Name of senior staff] door is open, they are always there for us.”

There were systems in place offered by the provider to support the staff team. These included access to staff assistance services, including counselling, as well as support for areas such as mental health and the menopause. A staff recognition scheme was also in place and events had taken place to recognise the contribution of staff across the provider’s services.