Swindon Intermediate Care Centre

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

This means we looked for evidence that the service 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 as good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect, and involved as partners in their care.

We have not awarded this service a score for Caring.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Caring.

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

Friends and Family Test results showed over 93% of people on Orchard Ward and 100% on Forest Ward would recommend the service.

People told us staff went “above and beyond”, “treated them with kindness, dignity and respect”, and made them feel “well cared for”.

Volunteers supported patients within the service, providing additional support and engagement. They were recruited externally and supported locally for their role on the wards.

We observed staff being discreet, responsive and respectful, taking time to interact positively with patients and those close to them.

Staff followed policies to ensure privacy and confidentiality of people’s care and treatment.

Staff demonstrated a non‑judgemental approach and showed understanding of people’s individual needs.

Staff respected people’s cultural, social and religious needs. For example, staff developed individual meal plans for people requiring Halal diets and made a room available for prayer on request.

One person we spoke to said “Staff are very pleasant, draw curtains around so I can be private when I have personal care, and I am treated carefully.”

The service 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 service made reasonable adjustments for disabled people, for example by ensuring access to premises and meeting patients’ specific communication needs.

Staff ensured people could obtain information about treatments, local services, their rights, and how to make complaints or compliments.

Staff communicated with patients in ways they could understand, using communication aids where necessary. Staff accessed interpreting services when required.

Staff held regular and effective multidisciplinary meetings to discuss patients and used daily huddles and patient safety summit meetings to highlight issues and outstanding tasks.

Staff gave patients and those close to them help, emotional support and advice when needed.

Staff supported patients who became distressed in open environments and helped them maintain their privacy and dignity.

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

Therapy staff actively set and reviewed treatment goals with patients on a regular basis and used this feedback to guide each patient’s rehabilitation journey.

The service enabled patients to access friends, family and carers, who could visit throughout the day. Staff also encouraged visits in areas such as the gym and small garden to support independence and mobility.

The service provided a range of equipment to support independence and rehabilitation, including mobility aids such as walking frames, crutches, hoists and wheelchairs, as well as adaptive utensils and specialist seating for daily living activities.

Staff selected and tailored equipment to meet individual patient needs and maximise functional outcomes.

We observed staff offering meaningful choices and respecting decisions. For example, staff asked patients if they wished to attend the gym for rehabilitation exercises and respected the choices of those who declined.

The service 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 identified and responded to changing risks to, or posed by, patients. For example, they responded to changes in a patient’s mobility that increased the risk of falls.

We observed staff responding to people’s needs quickly without delay. Staff answered call bells and emergency alarms promptly, typically within one to two minutes during our assessment. For example, we observed two medical incidents. On both occasions, staff recognised the deterioration promptly and responded quickly and appropriately. Staff followed emergency procedures, escalated concerns without delay and worked effectively together to ensure people received timely care and treatment.

Volunteers supported patients and families by offering teas and snacks. Staff told us volunteers worked closely with them, often sitting with patients and providing companionship.

The service 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 respected, supported and valued by their peers and immediate line managers, and they expressed pride in working at Swindon Intermediate Care Centre.

Staff accessed support for their physical and emotional wellbeing, including an occupational health service.

The service supported staff through menopause support and enabled them to reclaim prescription costs through the expenses process.

The service supported armed forces staff and made reasonable adjustments where required.

The service supported nursing mothers by making a quiet room available during working hours for breastfeeding or expressing milk.

Leaders shared weekly workforce data with managers to monitor sickness levels, overtime and use of bank staff, supporting oversight of staffing pressures.

The provider recognised staff achievements through initiatives such as Star of the Month and encouraged staff to nominate colleagues for Difference Awards.

The service actively celebrated the achievements, dedication and development of staff and volunteers, reflecting its values of care, innovation and compassion.

Leaders encouraged staff to attend organisational conferences to share learning, service improvement work and success stories, and invited external speakers to support learning and development.

We reviewed five staff appraisal records across both wards. These showed comprehensive discussions with staff, including career progression, development and service improvement opportunities. Appraisals also covered mandatory training requirements, ongoing supervision arrangements, and collaborative working with supervisors. We saw evidence that feedback from colleagues was incorporated as part of the appraisal process.

Senior staff described how supervision responsibilities were structured, with each senior member of staff allocated a group of junior staff to supervise, rather than one individual overseeing all supervision. This approach ensured supervision was evenly distributed, reduced the workload on individual staff, and supported more consistent oversight and staff support.

However, not all staff had received an appraisal following the service’s transition in April 2025. Despite this, staff demonstrated an understanding of the appraisal structure and described regular opportunities to raise concerns, discuss learning needs, and review their professional development with senior staff.

Some staff did not always feel supported by senior leaders, who they described as “remote” and “less approachable”.