243 Church Street

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 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 was exceptional at treating people with kindness, empathy and compassion and in how they respected people’s privacy and dignity. Staff always treated people who used the service and colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

When starting work new staff had to read a, ‘Care Charter’ which set out the ‘philosophy, focus and approach’, before signing an ‘Excellence in Care Contract’. This document ensured all staff read and understood what was expected of them and took ownership of this by signing their agreement.

Staff and leaders placed importance on people having choice and control. They asked people if they wished to meet with us and ensured anyone who was busy at the time had the opportunity to meet with us later in the day. This showed a thoughtful, person-centred approach where people’s wishes were central to the running of the service.

Staff were integrated into the life of the home, often choosing to eat lunch and take breaks alongside people. At the end of each shift, staff walked around the building to say personal goodbyes, reflecting genuine warmth and positive relationships.

Staff were highly skilled in person-centred practice and dignity in care. Staff engaged with people warmly and respectfully in ways that put them at ease. 3This showed the staff genuinely cared, and the training provided was effective in equipping staff with the skills to provide compassionate care.

A relatives told us, “The staff support is essential. They are so dedicated.”

A staff member told us, “We work in people’s home. I always try to remember that and treat them with respect.”

The provider treated people as individuals and was exceptional in how they made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. The provider took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

The care charter which staff were asked to read and sign before they began working at the service contained the statement, ‘Respect and dignity – we will treat each housemate with respect, recognising their unique abilities, preferences and choices’” This showed the provider had systems in place to ensure that people were treated as individuals and took steps to ensure staff were committed to this from their first shift.

Staff knew people’s communication styles and behaviour. They understood their reactions to people could impact their responses. For example, a person showed a behaviour which may have been considered concerning to those who did not know them. However, staff understood this behaviour was normal for that person and did not indicate they were in distress or attempt to intervene. Staff’s understanding of the person meant they were able to support them effectively and avoid intervening, which may have caused the person distress. This showed the provider treated people as individuals and understood the person for who they were.

The provider used language in documents which ensured people were treated as individuals. For example, handover forms were written with questions such as, ‘How was my day/night?’ The phrasing of this question meant staff were invited to think about the individual and how things had gone from their point of view, which meant the handover was more focused on how things had gone from people’s perspective rather than the staff’s.

A relative told us, “As far as activities go, nothing is imposed upon [person]. They enjoy walking, picnics, running around the garden, reading books, watching TV etc. They have a motability car and staff take them to pubs and cafes. They choose what they want to do.”

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

People were involved in their care planning, with the provider using accessible documents to communicate and records people’s choices. A document asked people 3 questions which helped to inform their care. ‘What makes a good day?’, ‘What makes a bad day?’ and ‘What will it take to have more good days and less bad days?’. This showed the provider had systems in place that were people at the centre of their care and involving them in decision-making.

The provider had systems in place to ensure people’s independence, choice and control was maximised. For example, leaders regularly completed a, ‘Dignity Audit’, which asked questions such as, ‘Is there a suitable means of communication for the person?’, ‘Have people been involved in their care planning?’ and, ‘Is choice is given to the person at all stages of interaction/observation?’. For this question, leaders had written an example they had observed where staff had given a person a choice between two different outfits. The person had rejected both choices and taken a different outfit out of the wardrobe. The staff member had determined the choice the person had made was appropriate for the weather conditions, so they supported the person to put their chosen outfit on. This showed the provider was committed to continually championing people’s independence and respected their independence.

We observed staff and leaders respecting people’s choices and allowing them to have control over their day. For example, a person had agreed with staff that they were going to go into the local town on the bus. However, the person kept engaging in other activities when it was time for them to go out. Staff explained the person was probably curious about our presence in their home and did not want to miss anything by going out. They said, “They might go to town later, or they might not go at all. Either way it’s fine and we’re led by them.” This showed staff did not try to pressurise people into engaging in activities they did not wish to take part in and respected their choice if they changed their mind.

Staff and leaders received training on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and person‑centred practice, supporting them to uphold people’s rights and promote autonomy.

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 were observed being attentive to people’s needs and being proactive, anticipating the needs of people who were unable to verbally communicate their requests, as well as responding to people who were able to request help.

Staff and leaders received mandatory training in communication, learning disabilities, dementia awareness, mental health awareness and sensory awareness. These training sessions supported staff’s awareness and skills in anticipating the needs of people who were unable to communicate them.

Staff were always present in communal areas, meaning there was always somebody on hand to meet the needs of people who required support.

The provider always cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and was exceptional at supporting and enabling staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Systems were in place to ensure that staff’s wellbeing was prioritised. For example, as part of the supervision process staff were asked about their health and wellbeing both at work and in their personal lives. Annual self-reflection forms contained questions such as, “Do you require any adjustments or support at work?” This showed that the provider considered the wellbeing of staff and embedded processes to support them.

The provider used some creative ways to promote teamwork and wellbeing for staff. In the staff room pictures of staff and leaders were displayed on a noticeboard. Staff were encouraged to write post it notes with kind words for their colleagues and stick it next to their photograph. Another noticeboard advertised ‘Staff Achievements in January and February’. This contained information both about achievements within work such as training courses being completed, and personal life events for staff such as staff getting married. This showed the provider recognised and valued the personal achievements of staff both in and out of work.

There were opportunities for development, with staff being supported to pursue training which they identified in supervisions and self-reflection forms completed after training sessions. Several leaders had progressed to their current roles from carer roles in the organisation. This showed the provider valued staff and gave them opportunities to progress.

We spoke with a staff member who is the allocated wellbeing lead. They explained the role meant they were available for confidential one-to-one discussions with staff about their wellbeing. The wellbeing lead can also make referrals to external support organisations to support staff wellbeing, liaise with leaders about ways of improving wellbeing, and they have responsibility for a budget every fortnight which they use to purchase wellbeing snacks for staff on shift.

A recent anonymous staff survey showed all staff who responded agreed they could talk to someone if they had work-related or personal problems, with most staff replying they, ‘strongly agree’.

Staff told us sometimes directors order dinners in or provide gifts for the staff, which made them feel valued. A staff member told us, “I was petrified when I started but everybody welcomed me, there’s such great teamwork.” Another told us, “I can’t think of anything that could be improved. Sometimes I finish my shift at 8 and I’m still here at 9 chatting to people and staff!”