The Rowans 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

At the last assessment the provider was in breach of regulations in relation to dignity and respect. At this assessment the provider had made improvements and was no longer in breach of regulations.

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 told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Previous areas requiring improvement identified at the last assessment had been addressed. Records showed decisions around people's care had been made and/or agreed with people, or their legal representatives.

Managers had assessed people’s mental capacity to make different decisions. When people lacked capacity, the provider liaised with their families and other professionals to help make decisions in their best interests

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.

Previous areas requiring improvement identified at the last assessment had been addressed. The manager ensured they spent time around the service completing observations of staff interactions with people. In addition to this the manager also completed dignity audits with people and staff.

People and their relative’s felt staff were kind and caring. One person told us, "The staff are all so lovely and have lots of patience." Comments from relatives included, "They [staff] are lovely, I can’t fault them" and "Staff are really caring I haven’t come across anyone who isn’t at the service" and "The staff are so good to [relative name] the level of care is really good."

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.

Improvements had been made to ensure people were treated as individuals. Changes to the staff allocation had supported more opportunities for staff to engage positively with people. However, not all interactions we observed between staff and people were positive. For example, we observed a member of staff supporting a person to move from one area of the service to another using equipment. The staff member did not communicate with this person throughout the whole procedure. We shared this with the manager, who stated they would address this. However, other interactions observed were positive and it was clear staff recognised people's abilities and supported them in line with these.

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

Previous areas requiring improvement identified at the last assessment had been addressed. Care plans informed staff how to support people to maintain their independence where able. One person’s relative said "Staff know [relatives name] likes and dislikes and let them help in doing tasks like making the beds."

We observed staff asking people how they would like to spend their time, and this was supported. People were supported to maintain relationships important to them as far as practicable, for instance friendships and seeing family members.

One relative told us, "Before moving into the service [relative name] had given up on a social life but now they enjoy attending the activities and is a lot happier."

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.

Previous areas requiring improvement identified at the last assessment had been addressed.

Staff were aware of people’s needs and understood when people needed assistance. For example, we observed one staff member approach a service user who was distressed, in a compassionate manner. This staff member was clearly in the middle of doing something, but they stopped what they were doing to respond to this person, and they did not leave them until they were comforted.