Freestones Residential 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 requires improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, involved as partners in their care and treated with dignity and respect.

This service scored 60 (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.

People and relatives told us staff, and the registered manager treated theme with kindness, empathy and compassion, and respected their privacy and dignity. People’s comments included, “Whole team of carers here are very kind and understand me well” and “Very nice and kind staff-they all have a different ability, and I have one I like the most, but others are also good at what they are doing.”

We observed staff supporting people’s needs in a prompt and warm manner. It was obvious people felt comfortable in the company of staff and staff knew people well. Staff maintained people’s dignity and supported people to choose how they wished to dress. People were offered aprons to protect their clothing from food spillage. Although serviettes were not readily available, staff were prompt to provide serviettes when people asked.

Relatives were positive about the caring approach of staff. They told us they visited without any restrictions.Comments included, “Communication is excellent; whilst the family are away, staff do video calls to see [Person name]” and “My relative is treated well with care, they and we know, [Person name] feels much better in here then when they were at home with me.”

Staff were keen to tell us how they treated people with kindness and dignity. Staff comments included, “We love all our residents and their family, it's like visiting your nan’s house” and “We know our residence well and always treat them with care and respect.”

The provider and staff treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences. The provider did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People told us staff respected their wishes, and they chose how they spent their time. Staff confirmed they treated people as individuals and provided care and support in a way that they preferred.

Staff demonstrated good knowledge of people’s individual personalities. We saw when people were napping, staff placed a blanket over their legs to keep them warm. Staff were aware of people’s diverse needs including faith and they ensured this was respected. A person told us about their chosen religion and how the staff were respectful about their choice not to celebrate occasions or seasonal events. However, people’s care plans were not reflective of their diverse needs, abilities and their protected characteristics. Relatives told us they had been asked to provide information about their family member’s life story which helped staff get to know people as a person. However, this was not consistently completed for everyone and reflected in people’s care plans and how they wished to be supported. The quality of information found in people’s care records was raised with the provider. They told us care records would improve as they were moving to a new electronic care system.

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.

Although staff promoted people’s independence and choices, their care plans did not contain the essential person-centred information to for staff to follow. There was limited or no evidence the person or their relative had been consulted in decisions made about their care and the role of staff. This potentially deprived people of having a say and exercising control over their lives.

Despite shortfalls we found in the care records, staff were keen to tell us they promoted people’s independence and provided choice to people wherever they could. This was confirmed by people who told us chose how they spent their time. One person told us they were not an earlier riser and liked to spend time in their room. We saw people seated in the lounge spent time watching the television, reading a magazine, doing a jigsaw puzzle and colouring.

Relatives were made to feel welcome and could visit anytime.A relative told us staff assisted their family member to use the stair lift when they wanted to retire to their room. Another relative told us, “Socially [Person name] improved ten-folds, they have a small group of ladies who sit and chat in the mornings and [Person name] calls them their friends.” We observed the external activity person had adapted an activity for a person cared for in bed, which the person was enjoying.

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.

Staff told us and our observations confirmed staff worked well together to respond to people’s individual care needs and requests for assistance. Staff communicated and shared information between them which was effective in ensuring people’s needs were responded to in a timely manner.

We observed staff were responsive to call bells and when a person’s floor sensor mat alerted. One person said, “I never wait to long for my help, nobody is rushing me, I do try to do things for myself, and carers ask me would I like to do this or that before helping me.” A relative said, “[Person name] has got a floor sensor mat and when they are standing on it; staff get there in a flash because they could fall. So far [Person name] has not fallen.”

Staff knew the people they cared for well and recognised and responded quickly when people become upset or distressed. For example, when a person was agitated, a staff member knew he person was fond of long hair and asked if they want to brush their hair. This was successful and with encouragement the person was able to plait the staff member’s hair. When another person became tearful the member of staff was quick to respond, they sat beside them, holding their hand and assured them in a kind voice.

The provider did care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff although the experiences of support and communication was not consistent.

Feedback from staff about support about their wellbeing and support was mixed. Staff told us they completed refresher training, but some staff were still not confident their training was sufficient to enable them to provide effective person-centred care. Staff were encouraged to take lead roles in certain aspects of care and career progression, but the training and support to develop the new skills for the roles was not always provided. A staff member with additional responsibilities told us, “There was too much paperwork, not a lot of support and I wanted to be with residents, that's my passion and what I enjoy doing.”

Staff described teamwork as positive and said they could rely on one another for help. A staff member told us, “Staff told us they worked as a team and valued the support from their colleagues.”

The provider told us they supported the staff team and provided on-call advice when required. They gave examples of supporting staff, which included adjustments to working hours to enable staff to manage personal circumstances and to undertake a professional qualification in care.