Four Oaks 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 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.

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 their relatives consistently described staff as caring, respectful and attentive to their needs. One person told us, "The staff here can't do enough….the staff always go the extra mile." This reflected wider feedback from people and families who spoke positively about the support they received and the relationships they had developed with staff.

Interactions between staff and people were warm and respectful. Staff took time to explain what they were doing, offered reassurance where needed and responded to people in a calm and supportive manner. People appeared comfortable in the presence of staff and there was a relaxed and welcoming atmosphere throughout the home. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people's individual needs, preferences and routines, and promoted people’s dignity and wellbeing.

People were offered choices regarding meals, drinks and support, and assistance was provided in a respectful manner. Relatives told us staff protected people's privacy, knocked before entering bedrooms and treated people with consideration and respect.
 

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 and their relatives told us staff took time to get to know them and understand what was important to them. One relative said, "The staff are amazing, patient and caring." This reflected wider feedback which described staff as knowing people well and understanding their preferences, routines and support needs.

Records reviewed contained person-centred information about people’s health needs, risks, routines and preferences. Care plans reflected individual circumstances and were updated when people’s needs changed. Staff were able to describe the people they supported and demonstrated an understanding of individual behaviours, preferences and support requirements. They could explain how support was adapted to reflect people’s needs, including known triggers, preferred approaches to care and personalised risk management strategies.

Family involvement was evident within care planning, Mental Capacity Act and Best Interest processes, and healthcare recommendations were adapted to reflect individual circumstances. Activities, nutritional support and daily care arrangements were tailored according to assessed needs, levels of dependency and personal choice.
 

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People were encouraged and supported to maintain independence, choice and control wherever possible. One person told us, "I feel independent. I can go to the shop with a member of staff, they have lots [of activities] going on." People described being able to make choices about their daily lives and spoke positively about opportunities to remain active and involved in activities important to them.

Staff offered people choices about meals, drinks, activities and daily routines. Staff supported people in a respectful manner and demonstrated an understanding of the importance of balancing independence with safety. Care plans and risk assessments reflected people's preferences and supported staff to promote choice whilst managing identified risks appropriately.

People had access to communal areas, activities and opportunities for social engagement, and families were encouraged to remain involved in people's lives. Although building works had affected some communal facilities, the provider introduced alternative arrangements to help maintain opportunities for social interaction and family contact. Restrictive interventions were monitored through established governance processes and reviewed to ensure they remained necessary and proportionate.
 

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.

People generally received timely support from staff who understood their individual needs and responded appropriately when concerns arose. A relative told us, "Communication is really good, even in the night, they [staff] will ring me." This reflected wider feedback that staff kept people and their families informed about changes in health and wellbeing and acted when concerns were identified.

Staff demonstrated an awareness of people's risks, health conditions and support needs. Daily governance meetings, handovers and review processes were used to share information about changes in people's wellbeing and any immediate concerns requiring attention. Staff described how changes in mobility, nutrition, skin integrity and general health were escalated to nurses, managers and healthcare professionals when required.

Records showed evidence of prompt referral and escalation where concerns arose, including dietary concerns, weight loss, wound management and deteriorating health. Care plans and risk assessments were updated when people's needs changed and professional advice was received.
 

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff, and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Leaders recognised the challenges associated with a period of workforce and leadership change and had implemented governance systems to monitor staff wellbeing, supervision, training compliance, competency and workforce stability. Recruitment, training and staff support featured within service improvement plans and governance oversight processes. Managers demonstrated awareness of workforce pressures and were taking action to strengthen workforce stability and support staff development.

Staff generally spoke positively about the support they received from managers and colleagues. Staff described managers as visible, approachable and available when support or guidance was needed. There was evidence of regular communication through daily meetings, competency development activity and supervision arrangements which helped staff feel supported in their roles.

Although the service had experienced turnover, recruitment challenges and a period of leadership instability, the provider was actively supporting staff through training, competency assessments and increased management visibility.