Wisteria Care

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 organisations with kindness and respect.

The provider had established effective systems and processes to ensure staff focused on building and maintaining open and honest relationships with people and their families, friends and others important to them. Staff spoke about people respectfully and with kindness. Staff were aware of the importance of respecting people’s privacy and dignity and ensuring they were comfortable with the care and support provided.

People were supported by staff who were always kind and caring and who supported them in a way which promoted their wellbeing. People and relatives commented positively about the care and support provided by staff. They told us staff were kind and caring. A person told us, “Carers are very good and caring. They always listen to me and respect my wishes.” All relatives confirmed that the staff were friendly and kind.

External health and social care professionals agreed. Comments included, “I worked with 1 carer in particular and could really see an excellent rapport with the person and [they] were very respectful and caring.”

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 and relatives told us staff knew them well and their care was delivered in the way they wanted and not in a task-centred way. People were treated as individuals and staff spent time getting to know them and supported them how they wanted.

The provider ensured that staff consistently treated people as individuals and quickly responded to changing needs. Each person had a care plan developed in close collaboration with them and others important to them. People received care which was personalised around their individual needs and preferences and in the context of their life histories and experiences. People’s personal, cultural, social and religious needs were considered in their care plans and staff demonstrated a clear understanding of people’s individual differences and how to support them in a way that suited them best. People’s care plans were detailed, and person-centred.

People had communication care plans in place that guided staff how to communicate with them, and people's sensory needs were considered in care plans.

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

People told us, and relatives confirmed, they had as much choice and control as possible in their lives. Comments included, “[Family member] is always given choice. Staff encourage and support [them] to stand, but they always listen to [their] wishes. When [they] don’t want to get up, staff respect this and deliver all personal care in bed. It all depends how [they] are feeling on a day. [Family member] always chooses [their] meals and has whatever [they] want.”

The provider ensured people were supported to have as much choice and control as possible in their lives and kept them informed about any changes to their support. This included people’s preferences in relation to the staff who provided their support. Staff knew people well and supported them to direct their own health and care whenever they could and encouraged them to maintain and develop their independence. They supported people to be independent when they were able and monitored them to make sure they were safe. A staff member told us “To watch people come out of hospital and to regain their confidence and strength to the stage where they don't need us is, so heart felt and like a personal pat on the back.”

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.

The provider established systems and processes to ensure people’s support plans contained person-centred guidance for staff on how to meet people’s emotional needs including details of the different levels and triggers for people’s distress and the action staff should take. This meant staff had information to identify when they needed to intervene to prevent or reduce the likelihood and impact of distress.

People and their relatives told us they felt listened to and that care was tailored to their individual needs and preferences. People were supported by staff who knew them well. This familiarity enabled staff to anticipate people's needs and respond promptly in ways that minimised discomfort and reduced distress. One relative told us, "When [family member] tries to rush things, carers are very good at giving [them] reassurance there’s no need to rush and support them to slow down and relax.”

The manager told us there were systems in place to ensure support was available when needs changed, including an on-call system for emergencies. They explained they could respond flexibly and provide additional support when people were unwell or required extra assistance.

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

The provider had systems in place to gather staff feedback and promote their well-being. There was a recent change in the management structure. The new manager told us they actively encouraged staff to share concerns and engage in open dialogue, fostering a supportive culture where staff felt heard and valued. They told us the provider promoted an open and supportive culture and described having an open-door policy, encouraging staff to discuss any concerns or personal issues and offering support where needed. The manager told us staff had access to employees’ benefits, such as company cars, “Staff are provided with the company cars. They pay a monthly fee and can use them as they please, privately as well. They get petrol allowance when they use them for work. All staff get a [monetary] gift card at Christmas. When needed they get support with accommodation or with family life.”

We received mixed feedback from staff about the management. Staff told us they had access to training and supervision needed to enable them to fulfil their roles and opportunity to feedback and engage in open discussion. However, not all staff felt supported, appreciated and treated in a way which supported their own wellbeing such as appropriate breaks and rest periods. We raised that with the provider, and they took immediate actions to address any issues. The manager told us they already recognised the need to improve scheduling of visits and prioritised an anonymous staff survey to gather staff feedback and improve staff engagement and overall morale. A new induction programme had been recently developed to provide staff with the skills and knowledge they need to support people.