Wollaton View 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.

The staff team showed a professional and understanding approach towards people and their relatives. We observed the staff team showing kindness and compassion when interacting with people. One person said, “They’re very kind and caring and we have nice chats.” A relative told us how kind and caring the staff team were, “They are, very much so. They totally listen to my family member and will chat with them too, to boost their mood.”

Another person explained how staff respected their privacy and preferences. They said, “I can decide to do more or less what I want, and we should do too.” Another person said, “Staff will close my door and curtains if I’m having help. I like to have them open during the day but shut for me at night.”

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.

During our site visit we observed staff were interacting with people in a meaningful manner with a calm and patient approach. People told us their preferences on the gender of care staff supporting them was respected. One person said, “There’s not many male staff, but they always check first if I’m ok with one supporting me.”

Feedback on the provision of food was mainly positive and meals were enjoyed, with menu choices offered and special diets catered for as required. People were encouraged to eat in the dining room for company and stimulation to maintain a healthy diet.

The management team told us they worked in partnership to ensure the best outcomes for people. The risk assessment tools used showed best practice in clinical care and support. These included the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), for monitoring weight. We saw these were regularly reviewed and staff understood the related guidance in place for people.

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

People told us that staff tried to encourage people’s independence, whenever practicable. One person said, “I have help with washing and showers, but I do the parts I can reach. I like to brush my own hair as I prefer to have it how I like. I do my own nails too.” People felt their individual choices and preferences were respected. One person said, “I enjoy my meals, and we get asked for our option. I usually sit in the dining room with friends, and I always have ice cream with cream for pudding. They know me! You can always ask for a little snack if you’re hungry later.” Another person said, “We get an evening trolley round with hot chocolate and a malt drink too.” A relative told us, “They really encourage my family member to eat as they can be a bit ‘picky’. They’ll do them soup or a special if they won’t eat from the menu. They always seem to eat better if they are in the dining room with company.”

We discussed how the management team obtained formal feedback. They advised a monthly newsletter was shared with people and their relatives. The management team held relatives’ meetings, although they were looking to improve the frequency and attendance at these meetings. We saw actions were recorded as being completed once any feedback had been reviewed.

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.

Most people we spoke with felt their call bell was answered fairly promptly, though occasionally at busy times it could take a little longer. Staff did explain to people and apologise if they had experienced a wait for a response. One person said, “I use mine mostly at bedtime, they always apologise if they’re slow responding or will let me know if there’s a wait.” Another person said, “It can depend how busy they are, but when I need the toilet, it’s usually not a long wait.” A relative told us, “My family member tries not to use it and bother the staff. I’ve rung for them a few times and the staff have come quite quickly.”

Where people could not communicate verbally, we observed interactions between staff and people which demonstrated relationships were caring and compassionate. One person lived with anxiety, and we saw they had a soft toy, which comforted and calmed them. All of the staff we spoke with understood the importance of ensuring this toy was available for the person if they exhibited distress.

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

Feedback from staff was positive, they told us they felt well supported by the management team. Some staff who had worked at the service for many years spoke of the positive atmosphere and staff culture. One staff member said, “Our manager is always available, even if they are busy.” Staff felt confident in speaking with the management team and feeling heard. The provider had a freedom to speak up policy in place, and information on this was available for all staff.