St Marks Court

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 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 relatives gave positive feedback about staff and care. During the assessment, staff treated people respectfully, offered support and maintained a calm and welcoming atmosphere. Care records guided staff about people’s communication, emotional reassurance and how they expressed pain or distress. One person told us, “Staff will always do their best for you.”

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, unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Care plans contained personalised information about people’s routines, communication needs, relationships, interests and sources of reassurance. Bedrooms contained photographs, personal possessions and items reflecting people’s interests. One staff member told us, “I think we provide good, personalised care to the residents. The staff get to know the residents’ needs and plan their care based on the individual.”

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

Records showed staff recognised and respected choices about personal care, daily routines, food and drink, activities, family contact and whether to accept support. Staff tailored meaningful activities to people’s interests, histories and abilities and recorded when people chose not to participate. People could maintain relationships, follow their faith and access the community, although activity provision and recording became less consistent during the recent activities coordinator vacancy. One relative told us, “Staff work with [Person] to work out a schedule that isn’t too intrusive.”

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.

Staff knew how people communicated pain, anxiety or distress, including when people could not use words to communicate. Care plans described individual approaches to reassurance and support. During the assessment, staff responded to people’s requests and provided support during lunch. Staff also described helping colleagues when people needed support. One staff member told us, “All staff help out if the care team are busy,” and gave the example of the home manager answering call bells at lunchtime.

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

Staff had access to meetings, one-to-one discussions, surveys and speaking-up arrangements. Managers monitored staffing, reviewed recruitment needs and arranged alternative cover when required. Staff feedback included positive comments about teamwork, flexibility and support. However, some appraisals and one-to-one meetings remained outstanding. One staff member described managers as “very supportive, even the regional manager”.