Avalon Park 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 65 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Overall, we saw people being treated with kindness and compassion by staff, although we did see several instances where people’s dignity could be compromised. This included people’s clothing not covering them correctly, despite staff being present in the room. Hoist transfers weren’t always explained by staff and people’s clothing was not always clean.

There were missed opportunities for interaction between staff and people living at the home where we observed staff sitting in the corner of lounges areas, not speaking with people. We provided this feedback to the registered manager who said they would speak with staff.

We noted staff had completed training and dignity/respect, although recommend this is updated to promote future learning.

People’s care plans contained details about the care they required, although some were lacking details in areas such as nail care, shaving and people’s choice of having a bath or shower. We were informed by the registered manager these would be updated to include this information.

People living at the home spoke positively about the care provided at the home. One person said, “I am very happy with the care I have received since living here.” Another person said, “The care is very good and the staff are always here to help me.” Relatives spoken with also said they were very happy with the care their family members received. One relative said, “We are extremely satisfied with the care provided to (person).” Another relative added, “Overall the care is very good.”

Everybody we spoke with consistently said staff were kind and caring towards people. One person said, “The staff are great and I like all of them.” A relative also said, “There are some excellent carers who are very caring.”

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.

Staff understood the importance of treating people as individuals with their own specific needs and wishes. For example, they knew the type of activities that different people enjoyed and also their preferences in relation to eating, drinking and clothing choices.

People told us staff treated them as individuals and were familiar with their preferences and daily routines. One relative told us, “Staff treat (person) with great respect and almost as a member of their own family.” Another relative added, “There is polite, gentle humour but always in a respectful way.”

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

People’s care plans captured information about things they could do themselves to retain their independence. Staff knew which people living at the home were independent and could do certain aspects of their care themselves. During the assessment, we observed people being able to do things for themselves such as walking, or eating their own meals if they were able to.

People said they were able to retain their independence where able. One person said, “Staff don’t do things for me, instead they remind me so I can do it myself.” Another person said, “Staff are around if I need them, but I do as much as I can for myself.”

There were systems in place to ensure staff had up to date information about people’s care and health needs. For example, we saw staff attending handover meetings where any concerns were discussed. During the inspection we saw staff responding to people’s needs in a timely way. For example, providing assistance at meal times, or carrying out any moving and handling tasks. As mentioned earlier in the report, we did observe staff not always protecting people's dignity in a timely way.

Staff demonstrated a good awareness of people’s health and medical needs and how they would respond. Emergency services were summoned when people had become unwell. People told us staff responded well if they ever had any problems or concerns regarding their health. One person said, “The doctor comes to see me if ever there are any problems.”

The provider did not always care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff. They did not always support or enable staff to deliver person-centred care.

We received mixed feedback about the culture within the home, which impacted on staff well-being. Some staff felt the management team were supportive and approachable, although others didn’t. Some staff also reported feeling ‘demoralised’ at times.

Team and individual meetings were used to discuss how staff were feeling at work and if there was anything the provider or manager could do to support them further.