Purley Gardens 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. This is the first assessment for this re-registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 70 (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 consistently told us staff were caring, gentle and considerate. One person said, “Staff are always nice to me. They are a good bunch”, while a relative remarked, “The staff are kind and never fall to provide my [family member] with compassionate care”. Another relative added, “Everything I have seen at the care home demonstrates real fondness for my [name of family member].”

During observations in communal areas, people looked at ease, comfortable and happy in the presence of staff. The way staff interacted with people was characterised by warmth and kindness. Staff were attentive to people, listening, reassuring and encouraging people to express themselves in their preferred way. Managers and staff spoke about people they supported in a respectful and affectionate manner. Staff responded sensitively when people appeared uncomfortable, offering reassurance in a calm and caring manner. For example, we observed staff reassurance a person who was visibly distressed by sitting next to them to hold their hand and make good eye contact while calmly reassuring this individual and politely enquiring what the issue might be.

People and relatives consistently told us their privacy and dignity were respected. One person said staff always close the door when they are providing any personal care.

The care home had a private dining area which relatives told us they could arranged to a have 3 course meal with their family members/friends. Relatives also said they were encouraged to sit and have meals with the family member in the main communal dining areas.

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care and support met their needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Staff treated people as individuals and understood what mattered to people, including about their lives, interests and backgrounds, and used this knowledge to build meaningful relationships.

Peoples care plans contained detailed information about an individuals’ life history, personal preferences and strengths. For example, staff supported people to practise their faith, access religious services, and maintain cultural connections, including matching people with staff who spoke their first language. A relative told us, “We like all the events and festival the home celebrates including, Mother and Father’s Day, VE Day, St Patricks Day, Christmas and Easter, Diwali, Eid and Chinese New Year.”

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

Staff supported people to remain as independent as possible, including encouraging mobility, and allowing people time to do things for themselves. Relatives told us staff encouraged independence while ensuring people were safe. One person said, “I am fairly independent and don’t always need any support from staff, which they do respect.”

Care plans contained a detailed overview of people’s differing dependency levels, so staff knew exactly what people were willing and capable of doing safely for themselves, and what tasks they would need additional support with. Several staff gave us examples of how they supported people to move freely around the care home by ensuring walking aids such as sticks and Zimmer-frames were easily accessible for people who needed this equipment to move safely.

People told us they were encouraged to make everyday choices about the care they received, food they ate and social activities they engaged with, which staff respected. One person said, “I get up and go to bed whenever I like, and I do like to go to bed rather late, which the staff know and respect.” We observed people were free to choose what the ate and drank at lunch and social activities they engaged in.

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 told us they could get help when they needed it and that staff responded promptly. Staff explained how they supported people to access community-based health and medical care services as and when required. Staff were aware of people’s health care needs and how to respond to any immediate health care emergencies to minimise the risk of people becoming distressed or unwell.

The service had not always promoted the wellbeing of their staff.

Staff consistently told us they had not felt supported, valued or part of a cohesive team when the care home had been led by the previous manager [registered], although most now felt the new managers were starting to turn things around and improve how staff wellbeing was promoted. Comments included, “I don’t think the previous manager cared much about any of the staff who worked here”, “I often felt belittled and humiliated by the former managers. The new lot seem much nicer” and “I certainly didn’t feel supported or valued at all by previous manager. They have brought in some new managers recently, so that’s a move in the right direction”. Senior managers were aware there had been significant concerns identified in relation to how the former registered manager had run the care home, which had contributed to low staff morale.