Balmoral Court 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 the last inspection we rated this key question requires improvement. At this inspection the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff always treated people with kindness, compassion and dignity. People consistently told us staff were kind, patient and respectful and that relationships had improved significantly since the change in management. One person said, “The staff are kind and patient, they help me if I want help. Staff talk to me about lots of things” and another told us, “The staff are kind and help me. The staff talk to me all the time; we have a laugh.” We observed warm, friendly and respectful interactions throughout the service. Staff knew people well, communicated respectfully and supported people in an unhurried way which promoted their dignity and wellbeing. Structured observations showed people appeared comfortable in the presence of staff and received positive interactions. Relatives and professionals also described an improving culture where people were treated with greater compassion and respect.

Staff now recognised and respected people as individuals. Staff had worked hard to develop a much better understanding of people's histories, preferences, interests and support needs. The manager described how staff were encouraged to learn about people’s lives, likes, dislikes and aspirations and regularly tested staff knowledge to ensure this understanding was maintained. People told us staff knew what mattered to them and involved them in decisions about daily life. One person said, “Most of the staff know what I like,” while another said staff asked them what they wanted to do and what they wanted to eat. Staff supported people to maintain interests, hobbies and social opportunities and had introduced initiatives such as resident ambassador roles and meaningful one-to-one engagement. Visiting professionals told us staff were knowledgeable about the people they supported and worked proactively to ensure care reflected individual needs. Although some care records still required further development to fully reflect the person-centred care being delivered, we found clear evidence that staff understood people as individuals and were tailoring support accordingly.

Staff generally promoted people's independence and respected their choices in day-to-day life. We observed staff offering choices and respecting people's decisions, including when people declined food, drinks or activities. People told us they could choose when to go to bed, what to eat and how to spend their time. Staff also supported people to maintain relationships and links with their community. Some people had restrictions relating to community access which had been identified through assessments involving external professionals and were intended to support their safety and the safety of others while enabling them to access the community. However, records did not always demonstrate consent, and capacity assessments and best-interest decisions were not always complete or consistently available for restrictions affecting people’s freedom. During the inspection, the manager took prompt action to support a person to visit their partner once they became aware of the request. These shortfalls meant legal and consent arrangements relating to restrictions were not always fully evidenced.

Staff now listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. They responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. People told us staff were available when they needed help and that concerns about their health were acted upon. Staff now understood people's needs well and worked closely with healthcare professionals to ensure changes in people's health and wellbeing were addressed promptly. Professionals consistently described positive communication, good engagement and effective partnership working. One professional said the home's communication and willingness to engage in discharge planning had been excellent, while another highlighted the manager's proactive approach to seeking specialist support. People described staff accompanying them to healthcare appointments and ensuring professionals understood their needs. Staff also responded quickly when people required reassurance or emotional support and we observed them spending time with people to ensure they felt comfortable and supported.

The provider now promoted staff wellbeing and enabled them to deliver good quality care. Staff consistently described significant improvements in the culture of the service and told us they felt valued, listened to and supported by the new management team. Staff said communication had improved, morale was better and they felt far more confident raising concerns and sharing ideas. One staff member told us, “I’m proud to work here.” Others said, “It’s much better” and “I’ve found my confidence again” Staff reported receiving regular supervision, training and opportunities to develop their skills. The manager had actively worked to address the previous closed culture through open-door arrangements, HR clinics, whistleblowing awareness and greater engagement with external professionals. Although some staff expressed concerns regarding staffing pressures on certain units, the overwhelming feedback demonstrated a workforce that felt more empowered, supported and able to contribute to service improvement.