Saint Elkas Care Home

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 changed to outstanding. This meant people were truly respected and valued as individuals; and empowered as partners in their care in an exceptional service.

This service scored 95 (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 was exceptional at treating people with kindness, empathy and compassion and in how they respected people’s privacy and dignity. Staff always treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect. Staff demonstrated exceptional kindness, compassion and respect for people’s dignity. Staff knew people extremely well, including their communication styles, emotional triggers, personal histories and the subtle ways they expressed their needs. This deep understanding enabled staff to support people sensitively, even when discussing or managing the most private or complex aspects of their lives.

Staff’s deep knowledge of each person, combined with their sensitive and respectful approach, created an environment where people felt safe, understood and genuinely cared for. By creating this atmosphere for people there was a reduction in people’s anxieties, which improved outcomes for them.

The registered manager demonstrated strong leadership and a clear commitment to delivering personalised care tailored to each person. Their enthusiasm was reflected across the staff team, supporting the delivery of a high standard of care to people. People, their relatives and stakeholders all gave us consistently positive feedback on how staff treated people. One person told us, “I am very happy here, staff know when to speak to me and when to not, staff are so kind and helpful.” A stakeholder told us, “[Staff] consistently advocate for [person], recognising that this can be challenging for them. Despite this, staff listen and respect their wishes. [Person] is treated with respect and dignity.” And another told us, “Patient Centred Care I feel that Saint Elka’s excel in this area. The home feels entirely non-clinical and residents are encouraged and supported to pursue their own interests, to take part in the wider community and to treat the house as their home.” And a relative shared that staff’s patient, kind and empathetic support had played a key role in helping their family member regain the confidence to take part in activities they had previously avoided.

The provider treated people as individuals and was exceptional in how they made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. The provider took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics. The provider demonstrated exceptional practice in recognising and valuing each person as a unique individual with their own preferences, histories, communication styles and aspirations. Staff had an in depth understanding of what mattered to people and consistently used this knowledge to shape highly personalised care and support.

Care plans were detailed, meaningful and clearly reflected people’s identities, backgrounds, routines and the things that were important to them. This supported staff to deliver care and support in a way that was respectful and genuinely person‑centred. Staff had built strong, trusting relationships with people and took time to understand how they communicated. This approach enabled people to express themselves, make choices and remain in control of their daily lives. Staff were skilled at adapting their communication, using personalised cues, visual prompts and reassurance to help people understand information and make informed individual decisions.

We saw several examples of how this highly individualised approach led to exceptional outcomes. One person, who had previously experienced significant anxiety about interacting with others or leaving the service, was supported through trust‑led approach that prioritised understanding of their needs and progressing at a pace they felt comfortable with. Over time, this enabled them to share their thoughts with staff and spend time in the service’s grounds and gardens which was a significant and positive change that reflected their growing confidence and sense of security.

Another person, who had previously faced considerable challenges, had been supported to build their confidence and independence to the point where they were now accessing the local community on their own and taking part in a range of community projects. This progress demonstrated the service’s exceptional commitment to helping people develop new skills, pursue their interests and achieve outcomes that were important to them.

People and relatives consistently told us how well staff treated them, and they described staff as understanding, patient and deeply committed to supporting people in ways that reflected who they were as individuals. This culture of personalised, compassionate care was embedded throughout the service and consistently empowered people to develop and build their confidence.

The provider was exceptional at promoting people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. Staff at every level demonstrated outstanding practice in promoting and enabling people’s independence. Staff understood that independence looked different for each person and worked patiently, creatively and consistently to help individuals build confidence, develop new skills and take pride in their achievements. The service provided clear evidence of how people had been supported over time to achieve positive outcomes, with staff actively promoting positive risk-taking. The service also utilised annex buildings located at the rear of the property, enabling people’s whose independence had developed to transition into a more independent living environment, requiring reduced levels of staff support.

People were given every possible opportunity to remain in control of their own health and wellbeing journeys. Staff ensured people had access to independent advocates whenever they wished, and advocacy was routinely offered rather than waiting for people to request it. Information about care, treatment options and health conditions was adapted in personalised ways, including the use of accessible language, and one to one discussion so people had the best chance to understand and make informed choices. Staff took time to check understanding, revisiting conversations and supporting people to express their views confidently. This empowered people to make their own 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. We observed staff being consistently alert to people’s cues and anticipating the support they might require. People told us staff were always available when they needed them. One person described needing support during the night and said staff were attentive, reassuring and promptly contacted a GP on their behalf. Stakeholders also confirmed staff were highly responsive to people’s needs and described them as ‘diligent’ in seeking medical assessments whenever they had concerns.

The registered manager and staff responded exceptionally well to people’s immediate needs, including those who required restrictions to keep them safe. Staff used thoughtful, proactive planning to ensure people’s needs were met promptly and appropriately, without relying on unnecessary or disproportionate restrictions. Their approach was rooted in a deep understanding of each person, enabling them to recognise early indicators of distress and take swift action to prevent escalation.

People had detailed communication and de‑escalation plans which guided staff in identifying subtle signs of discomfort, pain or emotional distress. Staff were confident in recognising these early cues and used them to adapt support, offer reassurance or adjust the environment before distress increased. We saw clear evidence that this proactive approach had significantly reduced the frequency and intensity of distress‑related behaviours over time.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. The registered manager demonstrated a strong commitment to promoting the continuous development of staff skills and learning. They fostered a positive learning culture within the service, where staff were encouraged to reflect on their practice, identify areas for growth, and build on their existing knowledge and competencies.

Staff were supported to access a range of training opportunities relevant to their roles, including both mandatory and specialist training. This approach enabled staff to apply learning in a practical context and continuously improve the quality of care provided. Regular supervision sessions and appraisals were used effectively to review performance, set development goals, and identify further training needs.

Staff told us they felt supported in their professional development and were encouraged to progress in their roles. The registered manager also promoted knowledge sharing within the team, creating an environment where staff could learn from each other’s experiences and expertise. This focus on ongoing learning and development contributed to a skilled, confident workforce, better equipped to meet the diverse and changing needs of people using the service.