Christopher Grange Rhona 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 the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 65 (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 observed positive interactions and heard staff speaking kindly with people. For example, one person experienced some emotional distress. Staff stayed with the person and offered them plenty of reassurance and comfort until their anxieties had subsided. We received positive feedback about the caring nature of staff. Comments from family members included, “The staff are something else. They are so friendly,” “I have confidence in the staff. Not just for them doing their role but also for the compassion they show, I can see that they care” and “We are happy and [Name] is happy. We visit every day. We appreciate the assurance of having [staff] here.”

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. People were encouraged to express their individuality and personalise their bedrooms with things that were important to them. We observed people were able to make day to day choices for themselves such as when they wanted to get up out of bed and where and when they chose to take their meals. People’s preferences were respected. Living in Christopher Grange Rhona House enabled people to practice their religion as there was an on-site chapel where daily religious services were held. Some family members spoke of the importance of this to their loved ones. We were told, “Having the church here is a bonus for [Name]” and “It’s a peaceful environment for [Name]. As a family we are catholic and very religious, the pastoral care here is great. The sisters come round and visit [Name], we are delighted.”

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. Activities were not always planned for people who were unable to leave their bed due to frailty or ill health. A family member told us, “The activity staff are lovely, but we can’t get [Name] to activities. We feel more is needed to occupy people’s minds when they are unable to get out of bed.” We shared this feedback with the management team. Other people were able to become involved in activities within the service, and we observed people attend and participate in musical events. Staff supported people to maintain relationships that mattered to them and people could receive visitors whenever they chose.

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. For example, one person’s health deteriorated and staff responded promptly and efficiently whilst ensuring they were offered appropriate comfort and reassurance. A staff member stayed with the person and continued to monitor their health and wellbeing until ambulance staff arrived and took them to hospital. A family told us about another recent experience when staff responded to a person’s immediate needs. They told us, “Yesterday, we noticed [Name] was quite chesty. Staff raised it straight away, got community matron out, very fast. Within few hours [Name] was reviewed and antibiotics were in place.”

The provider did not always promote the wellbeing of their staff. They did not always support or enable staff to deliver person-centred care. Christopher Grange Rhona House recently came under new ownership, and some staff told us they felt there was poor communication between the provider and staff. Recent changes in the management of the service had left some staff feeling ill-informed about the future management structure which was creating a degree of uncertainty and a sense of feeling undervalued within the team. We shared these views with the provider. Staff did tell us they felt supported by their peers and the immediate leadership within the service, particularly the nursing staff and the clinical lead.