Estherene House

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 requires improvement. 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 75 (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 received positive feedback from people and relatives about how the staff treated them with kindness and compassion. A person said, “All staff are kind.” Another person told us, “Staff are brilliant.” A person’s relative told us, “[Staff] very quickly built a wonderful relationship with [family member] and I think they are exceptionally caring and compassionate. They genuinely seem to love and know [family member] very well and usually have a funny anecdote of what [family member has] been up to when I pop in.”

We observed staff treated people with kindness and compassion in their interactions, and also in how they spoke about people.

People told us their privacy was respected, this included staff knocking on their bedroom doors before entering. We saw staff ensuring people’s dignity and privacy, such as adjusting a person’s clothing when assisting them using the hoist.

People’s care plans included information in how their dignity and privacy was respected. For example, a person’s care plan identified an item they always wanted to have with them, and they liked to change before attending activities.

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.

Improvements had been made in people’s care records in their communication needs and how staff were to communicate effectively. This included giving people time to respond and how their health condition may affect them differently on some days. A staff member told us how they had spoken with a person, and they had agreed to try out using pictures to help them to tell staff what they wanted.

People’s backgrounds, strengths and abilities were documented, as well as their aims in what they wanted to achieve in the care they received. Care plans included what was important to people and how this was respected. For example, a person’s care plan stated the importance of choosing, buying and wrapping gifts for their spouse and how this was achieved. The registered manager told us about ongoing work to speak with people about achievable goals, which was being done with care staff and the activities staff member.

Staff knew people well, which was evident from the discussions between staff and people we heard during our visits. A person’s relative said, “The staff know [family member] very well and have such a good knowledge of [their] preferences day to day. I appreciate [family member] will still have off days but they are always very patient with [family member].”

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

People’s care plans included their preferences of how they wished to be cared for and the areas of their care they could attend to independently. A person’s relative told us, “[Staff] have been amazing at encouraging [family member] to be more independent within the home… and this has made an incredible difference to [family member] in comparison to where [they were] on moving in, physically and mentally.”

People told us they made choices in their lives, including how they wished to spend their day and what they ate. We saw staff asking people for their preferences at mealtimes and they were shown what was on offer to assist them to make their decisions. A person told us they could have an alternative meal if they did not want what was on the menu, “If you want something else like an omelette or chips they will do it, as long as you let them know, they are very good… they cater for everyone here.”

People’s relatives told us they could visit their family member with no restrictions. A relative told us, “When I visit, I can stay for the day and have a meal with my [family member]... [Staff] always get me a cup of tea when I go in no matter how busy they are.” Another relative told us, “The [staff] will often kindly get us out some drawing or a pack of cards to play as a family when we [visit].” A person’s relative told us when they could not get to visit, they spoke with their family member on the telephone daily. During this time the staff updated them on their family member’s wellbeing.

A person told us they had recently changed their bedroom which was their choice, “I love the room and have it how I want it, consulted every step.”

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.

Improvements had been made, since our last assessment. Staff were available when people needed them, we observed staff responded to requests for assistance promptly. Call bell response times were monitored to reduce the risks of people having to wait for assistance.

During our visits we observed staff were available when needed and responded to people’s requests for assistance promptly.

People’s care records included information about triggers to and expressions of distress and anxiety. The care plans included guidance for staff in how to support and reassure people.

We observed lunchtime was a social occasion, with people choosing where they ate. Where people needed assistance, this was provided by staff and people’s own pace. However, we noted on our first visit the music was playing loudly but turned down by staff halfway through the service. A staff member ate their lunch at a table with people and they all chatted. During our second visit the television was left on, no one was watching it and the service was much busier with more people refusing to eat, this was confirmed by a staff member who people’s abilities could vary. Staff were very busy to ensure all people were supported and encouraged to eat. We fed back our observations to the management team who told us they would review the mealtimes.

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

Systems were in place to support the staff team. This included training to meet people’s needs and the opportunity to undertake qualifications relevant to their role. One to one supervisions supported the staff team to raise any concerns, receive feedback and identify any training needs they had. The registered manager told us about the system for staff induction, which included shadow shifts, training, competency checks and probationary supervision meetings. A staff member told us, “I feel supported and get supervisions.”

Two staff members told us how they were supported to progress in their role; this included additional training and the opportunity to do an additional qualification to help further their career.

Improvements had been made since our last assessment. Staff told us they felt they were supported by each other and the management team.

Information boards held posters of mental health support, Samaritans and bereavement support contact details. The management team told us about services staff were signposted to, should they need support. The management team were also mental health first aiders, to provide support should staff require it.

There was an employee of the month and year system in place, where people, visitors and staff were able to make nominations.