Bentley Lodge 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 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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisation's with kindness and respect.

People were observed to experience positive relationships and interactions with staff, who were kind and caring to people. There was a good atmosphere. People provided positive feedback and said, “I’m treated well” and “They [staff] engage with me, they are like family.” Staff were observed to treat people with kindness and compassion. People told us, “They [staff] are very kind and helpful.” Staff were seen to respect peoples’ privacy and to consider their dignity.

Staff knew people and their preferences well. They were able to tell us about people’s individual preferences and routines for their care. Staff told us they spent time getting to know people when they were first admitted.

We saw overall staff focused on the needs of the person receiving care rather than just the task when delivering people’s care. However, we observed some staff although very polite to people at lunchtime on the first day, had limited conversations with them. Although no-one we spoke with fed back that staff did not engage and chat with them. We spoke with the registered manager, who told us staff from some cultures approached the lunch service as a time for quietness and respect, rather than a time to chat. We saw evidence they had discussed cultural norms and differences with staff at a recent meeting. They also planned to look at the mix of staff on each shift, to ensure the more outgoing staff were working with the quieter staff. They were aware of this issue and addressing it. We noted improvements by the second day.

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 and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People’s personal, cultural, social, religious and communication needs were documented within their care plans. People had communication plans, and their life story was noted. Staff said people’s care plans guided them, where the person was unable to communicate verbally, for example, about how to assess if the person was in pain or how to understand their facial expressions.

Staff supported people in accordance with their individual needs and preferences. Staff told us, “We use a person centred approach – everyone here is different” and “Everything we do should be specific to that person.” A relative told us, how they had personalised their loved one’s room to reflect their hobby and how staff had also supported the person to experience and enjoy their interest. We saw another person’s care plan noted they liked music. We observed they were cared for in bed and music was playing gently.

People’s religious observances were noted and there was a monthly in-house church service. We received feedback about how staff sat and read to a person, which both respected and met their religious needs. Staff had also recently taken 2 people to the local church.

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

Staff were observed to be offering people different choices and involved people in decisions about their day-to-day care and support, for example, in relation to their meals and how and where they spent their time. People’s feedback included, “I get choice” and “They [staff] do talk to me about things.”

People’s care plans documented what they could do for themselves. Staff told us, “Whatever a person is able to do, we need to encourage them and only assist as necessary.” People were encouraged to spend their time how they wished to and go out if they wanted. We observed staff asked a person to assist them with a task, their face lit up and they clearly enjoyed helping out.

People were also provided with a wide range of activities for stimulation. The 2 activities staff utilised the 2 lounges to run different types of activities in each lounge, within 1 were the more ‘interactive’ activities and in the other the quieter activities. This gave people a choice depending on their interests and mood. We saw people had been involved with Remembrance Day commemorations, which included people and staff working together on the creation of an embossed remembrance plaque for display outside the home entrance on Remembrance Sunday.

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 ensured people had their call bell within their reach. People’s ability to use their call bell was noted in their care plan and people who were unable to summon help were checked upon regularly by staff. People when asked about the responsiveness of staff said, “They are very quick if I need them.”

Staff responded positively when people living with dementia showed signs of distress or agitation. They remained calm and warm in their interactions and validated how people were feeling. Staff spoke with a person who was distressed about what was unsettling them.

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

Staff told us they felt respected, valued, supported and listened to in their role. Feedback included, “I feel very valued for the work I do” and “Management supports me.” Staff told us how if they had their own needs or concerns these were listened to and accommodated.

The registered manager told us; they monitored the hours staff worked and ensured they took their scheduled breaks and annual leave. Staff were encouraged to speak directly to them or to use their supervisions to discuss any issues.

Staff were recognised for their individual contributions with a voucher or gift. On the morning of the first site visit the staff transport was unavoidably delayed and the night shift staff all agreed to stay on until the day shift staff arrived to ensure people’s breakfast and care delivery was not disrupted. Staff’s response was acknowledged at the morning’s head of department meeting and staff were rewarded with a takeaway to thank them for their teamwork.