The Meadows

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 dignity and respect.

This service scored 60 (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.We observed staff supporting people in a respectful and considerate way during our inspection. People spoke positively about staff, describing care staff as, “Staff are nice” and “Staff are okay.”Relatives told us staff are kind and supportive. A relative told us, “The staff are an amazingly good bunch.”

The provider did not always 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.For example, the kitchen cupboards and freezers were padlocked, we were told this was to support one person in the service. This meant other people at the service were not treated as individuals, as their preferences regarding access to the kitchen were not taken into consideration. When we raised our concerns with the provider, they advised us that they would review this. However, staff knew people well and supported them in a way that reflected their individual needs, routines and preferences.A relative told us, “It’s a very relaxed atmosphere at The Meadows, for example when they are watching football they tease each other, including the staff.”

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, people with epilepsy had monitors in their rooms which were used during the night to enable staff to hear if the person had a seizure and required support. We observed the monitors to be on in the staff office during the day, enabling staff and visitors to hear people in their rooms. The provider advised that they shouldn’t be on and actioned our concern. However, a person told us that there were no restrictions on them going for a walk on their own, which they enjoyed doing. The person’s care plan reflected the support in place for their independent walks.

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.We observed staff responding to people’s requests for support in a sensitive and supportive manner. Staff gave people time to communicate their wishes, allowing people time to tell them what they needed.

The provider did not always care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff. They did not support staff to deliver person centred care. Decisions made by the provider demonstrated a poor regard for the welfare of their staff team. For example, staff at the service worked prolonged shifts, some staff worked a continued shift over 48hrs. When we informed the leadership team of our concern, they reviewed staff shifts and implemented separate day and night shifts ensuring that staff had appropriate rest between shifts and to be safe and effective in supporting people’s needs.