Worsley Lodge

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.

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 spoke highly of the staff and were largely complimentary about the care provided. One person shared, “They are all very good and kind. They do everything they can for you.”

During our observations, staff were frequently required to interrupt their current tasks to provide reassurance to people when needed. While these interactions were positive and well-received, the need for staff to pause their duties suggests limited staffing capacity to consistently meet both emotional support needs and routine care tasks.

Staff communicated in a warm, respectful, and considerate manner. They clearly explained their actions while providing care and consistently maintained individuals’ privacy and dignity. This approach helped to ensure that people felt comfortable, respected, and reassured.

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.

The provider recognised and respected each person as an individual, taking their personal preferences, backgrounds and circumstances into account. Staff demonstrated a strong knowledge of the people they supported and showed a clear understanding of how individuals wished their care to be delivered.

People were encouraged to maintain meaningful relationships. Visitors were welcomed warmly, and the home fostered an open and inclusive environment.

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

Staff supported people to make informed choices and helped them manage any associated risks using a least restrictive approach. For example, when individuals chose to smoke or vape, staff provided guidance about the potential health impacts while respecting their right to make their own decisions.

The service’s wellbeing coordinator had developed strong, positive relationships with both people and their relatives. Individuals spoke very highly of the coordinator and the range of activities available. People enjoyed trips to Blackpool and a safari park, as well as regular outings such as pub lunches and canal boat trips. We observed the meaningful connections the coordinator had with people and how they were encouraged to participate in activities such as general knowledge quizzes and armchair exercises.

However, some individuals who tended to remain in their rooms told us they were not always aware of the activities taking place and therefore did not always have the opportunity to participate.

The service also benefited from a volunteer who attended two days a week to support activities and engage with people. This contributed positively to people’s overall wellbeing.

We observed people moving freely around the home, accessing communal areas and the garden, and returning to their rooms whenever they wished. People were also supported to access the community. For example, one person attended football matches, while another, who enjoyed shopping, was supported by a support worker to visit local shops.

The provider did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

People and their relatives expressed mixed views about the responsiveness of care provided. One person told us, “There’s not enough staff. You press the buzzer and sometimes wait up to two hours. I want to go to the toilet on my own, but they worry I’ll fall. Some staff say I can’t go to the toilet.”

A relative told us, “I have asked for minutes of family meetings and have not received any. Staffing numbers are too low. A district nurse had to assist (relative) a couple of months ago with using the toilet. (Relative) says they feel treated like a piece of meat, it is rushed, and they feel ‘done to.’ Everything feels frantic, and nobody listens.”

We observed that call bells were not always answered promptly, and people sometimes had to wait for assistance with personal care, which appeared to be due to staffing levels. Some people and relatives spoke positively about staff, and nobody reported any incidents to us, one relative said, “I don’t think they have enough staff, although they do make sure (relative) is looked after.” However, we saw that staff were working hard to meet people’s needs.

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.

Staff generally spoke positively about the support they received from management and described feeling well supported in carrying out their roles. However, staff told us that the lack of staff impacted their wellbeing, some also indicated that they did not always feel fully listened to, particularly when raising suggestions or concerns.

Support arrangements included regular supervision, access to training, and ongoing day-to-day oversight from both the manager and deputy manager. This helped staff feel guided and supported, although there was scope to further strengthen how staff feedback was acknowledged and acted upon to ensure they felt consistently heard.