Winscombe 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 changed to requires improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to person-centred care. We identified a lack of meaningful activities for people who were profoundly disabled.

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.

People and their relatives told us staff treated them with kindness, compassion and dignity. Comments included, “The quality of care my brother receives at Winscombe is in my opinion very good, his care needs are met for him on an individual basis, as he is unable to communicate through speech his care needs are actively addressedby knowing and implementing what is needed for him.” After a stay in hospital, a relative said, “The patience,kindness, care and knowing him, pulled him through and we will always be aware that this level of care kept him going and honestly in my opinion kept him alive so we will always be grateful for thestandard of care and professional support they gave to him and ourselves.”

The provider did not treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics. Whilst the provider was able to demonstrate a variety of activities had taken place, for people with profound disabilities, these activities were not always engaging or person centred. The registered manager told us there was limited therapeutic activities or treatments available to people but informed us this was an area the management team would be reviewing.

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. For example, we observed 2 people watching a particular film on the television. A member of staff told us it was their favourite film and said, “They watch [X] everyday, they love it, it’s all they do”. The staff member was unable to tell us how they knew the 2 people wanted to watch the film. They said, “I just know they like it so we put them [people] in front of the TV”. This meant people were not always able to remain in control or that their choices were appropriately considered.

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. Risk assessments were not always followed to ensure people were kept safe in relation to fire risk for example. We observed staff were not always responsive when people experienced discomfort during mealtimes or when people found it challenging to use their mobility aids.

Staff consistently told us they were supported in respect of their wellbeing. Comments from staff included, “All our management are very supportive in the best way they can be we are well equipped with essential trainings that help us to feel more confident when delivering care to our service users” and “The manager ensures we receive appropriate training, including regular medication competency assessments. I feel confident in delivering both personal care and medication safely, thanks to ongoing support and supervision”. Staff survey results demonstrated staff were satisfied with the leadership and support provided by their line manager and enjoyed their job.