Thanet 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 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 were not always supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 55 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We found there were instances where people did not feel staff were caring, the provider has addressed some of the concerns however, more time was needed to ensure people were confident that a culture of kindness and compassion was in place.

Despite these concerns we observed positive interactions between people and staff during the inspection and people spoke positively of some of the staff who knew them well. We saw staff treating people with sensitivity and compassion

The provider did not always make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. Care plans contained people’s life story but they there was not enough information about people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, interests and hobbies to ensure staff understood people fully.

Despite the issues we found with person centred care planning people also told us they were generally happy living at the service. They told us most staff understood them and their daily routines well. People were able to decorate and furnish their room in line with their personal taste. One person told us they were happy they were allowed to keep a pet of their choice.

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. There was minimal information in place about how people were being supported to maintain and develop independent living skills.

Staff told us how they tried to empower people to be as independent as they wanted in day-to-day living skills such as maintaining their personal space and participating in cooking sessions. Despite these intentions there were no formal skills teaching plans or goal monitoring processes in place, so we were not assured this approach to promoting independence was consistent, effective and adopted by all staff. This was reflected in feedback we received from people. One person told us they did not feel they were supported to work towards goals or aspirations.

Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. There were risk assessments in place for people who were at risk of distress or anxiety. However, not everyone using the service felt these were effective and this impacted their feeling of safety from others using the service.

Despite this, records showed staff were responsive when people were upset or distressed and they took action to help reduce this.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff. There was a wellbeing strategy in place which set out the provider’s commitment to building a supportive workplace where staff felt valued. Staff told us they received regular supervision to support them in their day-to-day work and managers were approachable, supportive and interested in their wellbeing. One member of staff told us, “Wellbeing is supported with one-to-one supervision sessions, staff training and information conversations. We are also encouraged to have time off work when we need a break.”