Eccleshare Court

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 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People and relatives consistently spoke positively about staff and described them as caring and approachable. One relative told us, "The staff are lovely," whilst another said, "They are all very kind." People told us staff treated them with dignity and respected their choices. A further relative told us, "The carers have got to know [my family member] very well and [my family member] likes them. To see [my family member] smile when they see some of them approaching, makes me feel very happy."

During the inspection, we observed warm and positive interactions between staff and people living at the home. Staff took time to engage with people, offered reassurance where needed and communicated in a respectful manner. People appeared comfortable in the presence of staff and approached them confidently for support.

We observed staff knocking on bedroom doors before entering and supporting people discreetly when discussing personal matters, helping to maintain privacy and dignity. Whilst some people expressed concerns about delays in receiving support during busy periods, there was no evidence staff interactions were task-focused or uncaring.

However, language used within some care records was not always consistent with dignity and respect principles. In particular, some descriptions relating to people living with dementia appeared judgemental and did not always reflect a person-centred understanding of the reasons behind people's actions or distress. This was not consistent with the caring and respectful interactions we observed between staff and people living at the home.

The provider was aware of this issue and had plans to improve the use of person-centred language within care records.

People's care reflected their individual needs and preferences; however, the quality of care planning was inconsistent and did not always provide a comprehensive picture of the person.

People and relatives told us staff understood people's individual needs and preferences. Relatives were positive about communication with the service and felt involved in discussions about their family member's care. Staff were able to describe people's routines, preferences and how they adapted their approach to meet individual needs.

However, the quality of care records varied. Whilst some records contained personalised information, others lacked detail regarding people's communication needs and the approaches staff should take to support them effectively. We found a record which referred to set 'bed times'. This reduced assurance that care planning consistently reflected people's individual preferences and choices and promoted a person-centred approach to care.

The provider was aware of these concerns and was undertaking a review of care plans to improve their quality and person-centred content.

People were supported to maintain relationships and take part in meaningful activities that promoted their wellbeing.

People told us they were able to receive visitors and maintain contact with those important to them. Relatives described being welcomed by the service and told us communication arrangements supported them to remain involved in people's lives. Staff also described supporting people to maintain contact with family members who were unable to visit regularly.

We saw a varied programme of activities and received consistently positive feedback about the activities team. One relative told us, "I rate them very highly. They have a good team of girls for activities, and they often go out to the garden. There’s lots of action – besides bingo etc. they celebrate events such as Valentine’s Day and the World Cup. They take them to the pub to watch the games." Another relative said, "Whenever I look at the Facebook page, my [family member] is always out, playing games, or watching football matches. [My family member] is very active and always busy."

Staff told us the activity provision was the best it had been for several years and described efforts to adapt activities to meet different needs and preferences. People who remained in their rooms or were cared for in bed were offered individual engagement and visits from activity staff to support inclusion and reduce the risk of social isolation.

During the inspection, we observed people being offered choices and involved in decisions about their day. Staff encouraged people to do as much as possible for themselves whilst providing support when needed, helping people maintain choice, control and independence in their daily lives.

Staff responded to people's immediate needs with care and compassion. People and relatives were mostly positive about the way staff responded when support was required. One relative told us, "In my few months of visiting, I have noticed that the staff are very responsive. There is always a member of staff present in the lounge, and they are quick to respond. They communicate well with each other and I am very impressed. They know what residents are doing." However, some people and relatives told us there could be delays in receiving assistance during busy periods, particularly at weekends. Staff also acknowledged there were occasions when competing demands made it more difficult to respond as quickly as they would like.

During the inspection, we observed staff offering reassurance, responding to requests for assistance and providing support in a calm and respectful manner. Staff described adapting their approach to the individual and recognising that people communicated their needs in different ways. People told us staff listened to them and acted when they raised concerns or required support.

Staff told us they worked well together and supported one another in their roles. They described positive relationships with leaders and felt their views and ideas were welcomed. Staff spoke positively about opportunities to develop their knowledge and skills.

This contributed to a supportive working environment where staff felt valued and involved in the development of the service.