Stratford Road

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.

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.

Staff did not always treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respect their privacy and dignity. Staff failed to recognise that a person’s bedroom door was open whilst they were taking a nap and proceeded to go into their room. They talked about the person, making no attempt to involve them in the conversation we were having or appearing to understand how this was an infringement on the person’s privacy, dignity and respect.

Staff were, however, generally kind and interactions between people and staff were warm with light-hearted exchanges. A family member told us they believed staff were caring and kind to their relative and they had never seen anything to cause them to think otherwise.

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. A family member told us how their relative had enjoyed swimming in the past and how they believed the person enjoyed being in water. Staff were unclear as to why this was not happening now. Whilst they told us it was the responsibility of a particular staff member to look into this, no venue had been explored within the area which gave doubt to whether this would happen.

One person attended a community centre 1 day a week where they helped make tea and chatted to people. They told us they liked this and wanted to do more things like this. However, the rest of their week was less structured, and the managers acknowledged more activities were needed.

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.

Whilst staffing levels meant people could go out during the day a family member felt there needed to be more things for people to do. They told us, how they had discussed the issue of insufficient activities with a social worker but felt no clearer about what could be offered and did not know who else they could talk to.

One person frequently visited the courtyard of the property where they lived accompanied by 2 staff. The service had reviewed this risk and had identified a lesser restrictive measure which resulted in just 1 to manage a risk of the person leaving the premises. This meant the person was beginning to exercise greater independence in this activity.

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 concern. People’s questions were immediately answered, and they were reassured patiently and provided with the information they needed. For example, a person asked about when they were going shopping and to see their family. Staff talked with the person and helped them to remember when these things would happen.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to do their jobs. Staff had access to training and supervision which helped them do their jobs.

The manager told us the provider had various incentive schemes to help staff. For example, they had a confidential help line which offered free advice to staff on a number of different issues. There were also staff awards where staff were recognised for their achievements and contributions to the provider and the people they supported.