Dignity Residential 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 outstanding. This meant people were truly respected and valued as individuals; and empowered as partners in their care in an exceptional service

This service scored 90 (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 was exceptional at treating people with kindness, empathy and compassion and in how they respected people’s privacy and dignity. Staff always treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People using the service were supported by staff who consistently demonstrated kind, compassionate and respectful care. Feedback from family members indicated that staff knew people well, supported by continuity of staffing, which enabled strong, trusting and positive relationships to develop.

Staff communicated effectively with people, including those living with dementia, using patient, calm and respectful approaches. Staff were observed speaking at eye level, making eye contact and responding sensitively to emotional distress or repeated questions. A relative highlighted positive communication practices, saying staff came down to sit at the same level as their relative and made eye contact when communicating, despite [relative] not using speech. Another relative said, “Staff just talk to [relative] as a human being,” reflecting a respectful, inclusive, and dignified approach.

People were treated as individuals and spoken to in a way that upheld their dignity and self‑worth.

Privacy and dignity were respected at all times. Staff knocked before entering rooms, addressed people by their preferred names and ensured doors were closed during personal care. Relatives expressed confidence that care was delivered discreetly and respectfully.

People’s choices, and preferences and were known and acted upon. Staff consulted both people and their families about preferences for food, clothing, activities and daily routines, and these were reflected in the care provided. Families reported feeling welcomed, listened to and kept informed. One relative said, “The carers are lovely, really nice and approachable. They have a great relationship with mum. They chat with us and make her comfortable. They welcome us and update us. They’ve been really nice. Another relative said,” “I think they [staff] are very caring. They’re reassuring and competent. They build close and good relationships with people. It’s a small home and enables that.”

People were treated with kindness, compassion, and respect by the staff. Staff knew people well and responded to them appropriately and sensitively.

People and their relatives spoke very highly of the warmth and kindness of the staff team, and how they were treated with dignity and respect.

Staff spoke warmly about the people they supported. One commented, “Absolutely [relative] is treated with dignity and respect Occasionally [relative] wants their room and own space. The carers check [relative] is ok but give them that space.”

Family members spoke positively of the staff and the care people received. A family member said,” “It’s like a family”. A great service.” One visiting health professional said,” If I were completing the family test and considering a home for a relative, I would have no hesitation in considering this service.”

The provider worked hard to create a caring culture where staff valued and promoted people’s individuality, upheld their rights and supported them to develop and flourish. There was a clear commitment to valuing people as individuals and supporting them to reach their full potential and work towards their personal aspirations.

Staff gathered and used life‑history information to understand people’s backgrounds, interests and values. This helped staff have meaningful conversations and supported people to share their views and make choices in ways that felt familiar and comfortable to them.

Staff supported one person, who had previously worked as a florist, to arrange flowers when they were brought into the home. This recognised the person’s skills and experience, supported them to make their own decisions, and helped them stay connected to an activity that was meaningful to them. Staff also supported another person who enjoyed gardening to continue this interest. They helped the person to create and care for flower beds using raised planters and tubs, which enabled them to take part safely and maintain independence in an activity they valued.

Staff and managers emphasised the importance of treating people with dignity and recognising their strengths to build confidence and promote independence. Staff respected each person’s choices and supported them to live in a way that reflected their personal values. One relative told us, “Staff got to know [relative] by sitting and talking about [relative’s] life.”

Staff we spoke with clearly understood the people they supported and could explain what mattered to them. Staff knew about people’s backgrounds, likes, hopes and needs, including individual preferences, health and wellbeing needs, and how to promote independence.

Staff supported one person, who had previously worked at the service, to take part in familiar and meaningful tasks around the home in a safe way. Staff supported them to lay tables, assist in the kitchen at teatimes, wash up, wipe surfaces and clear tables. This respected the person’s life history and supported their sense of purpose, choice and control.

Staff told us the person liked to ask about staffing levels and shift cover, which showed their continued interest in how the service was run. Staff engaged positively with these conversations, listening and responding in a respectful and reassuring way. This acknowledged the person’s life history, supported their identity and sense of purpose, and promoted dignity, choice and meaningful involvement.

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

People were supported to have choice and control over their care, treatment, and wellbeing. The provider demonstrated exceptional practice by ensuring care, support, and treatment were personalised and responsive to people’s needs and preferences. Staff took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture, backgrounds, and protected characteristics.

The provider promoted a positive culture in which staff valued people’s individuality, upheld their rights, and supported them to develop and achieve positive outcomes. There was a clear commitment to valuing people as individuals and supporting them to reach their full potential and pursue their aspirations. Staff supported those who wished to attend church, and church representatives visited the home three to four times a year to deliver services and seasonal sing‑alongs that reflected important times in the religious calendar.

Staff supported people to follow their cultural and religious dietary preferences and ensured these were respected in meal planning. For example, staff provided vegetarian meals for one person who chose this diet and previously supported people who were Catholic to observe meat‑free Fridays by offering fish instead of meat.

People were actively involved in decisions about their care and support. Staff discussed preferences with people, recorded these appropriately, and respected them in practice. One professional told us, “The staff were extremely knowledgeable about the individual needs of each person and go to great lengths to ensure everything is done in people’s best interests.”

Staff and managers consistently emphasised the importance of treating people with dignity and respect, recognising their strengths to build confidence and promote independence. People were supported to make choices and live in a way that reflected their personal values. For example, staff supported people to exercise their right to vote, either by attending local polling stations or by accessing postal voting options, ensuring their voices were heard and their rights upheld. Staff were knowledgeable about the people they supported and clearly articulated what mattered to them.

Staff spoke about the level of support provided to help people develop independent living skills. We observed strong, respectful, and supportive relationships between staff and people. Staff offered meaningful choices and opportunities, and people were encouraged to express their views and make decisions about their daily lives.

People told us staff supported them to have maximum control over their day‑to‑day lives. Relatives said people were encouraged to follow their own routines, including choosing when to get up in the morning, rather than being expected to fit into fixed schedules. One relative told us this approach had a positive impact on their relative’s wellbeing.

Relatives told us people were supported to make choices about what they ate, and that staff provided options so people could decide for themselves. One relative commented, “[relative] is very happy with the food. It is fresh and cooked on the premises. There are always two choices at lunchtime, and there is plenty to drink.” This showed us staff respected people’s views and preferences and enabled them to remain in control of everyday decisions.

Where people found it difficult to make decisions, relatives explained that staff did not take control away but instead supported decision‑making in a way people could understand, for example by offering a choice of clothing or making suggestions to help people decide. One relative said, “[Relative] struggles to make choices. But staff offer them anyway. They make suggestions to help her like would you like to wear this or that.”

People told us they were able to choose when to have breakfast within a set period and select their own clothes without restriction.

Staff promoted people’s right to choice and control, supported independence, and enabled people to be actively involved in decisions about their care and support.

People personalised their bedrooms in line with their individual tastes, displaying valued photographs and keepsakes that reflected their identity.

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.

People were supported by staff who knew them well and could respond to their immediate needs. This included understanding their individual communication needs and recognising quickly if they were becoming distressed.

Staff knew people very well which meant they recognised potential early warning signs of distress and how to distract a person and how to keep them safe. Staff could talk in detail about people’s care and support needs .One relative said, “I think they [staff] are competent in dealing with [relatives] emotional needs. [relative] has times when they can’t cope very well and they deal with that quite well.” Another relative said, “They [staff] know how to work with his dementia. They answer the same question he asks again and again. I’ve seen them talk to people who are confused. They [staff] are always very respectful.”

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

The registered manager encouraged staff to share feedback and ideas and created an environment where staff felt confident, they would be listened to and their views taken seriously. Staff described feeling well supported in their roles and recognised for their contribution to improving standards and delivering good‑quality care. The registered manager ensured staff received regular individual supervision and attended team meetings, which gave them opportunities to reflect on practice and raise any concerns.