Walton Manor Residential and Nursing 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 Walton Manor Residential and Nursing Home 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 70 (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. Staff told us they respected people and put their needs first. Interactions we observed were kind and considerate and people were happy with the care provided. Comments from people included, “I am very happy. Staff are lovely” and "They look after me wonderfully."  Feedback from relatives was also positive. Comments included, “I have seen staff being kind towards [Name],” “Staff are amazing" and “I only have positive things to say. I cannot sing their [staffs] praises enough.”  

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. Most care records we looked at included details of people’s history to help inform staff about their hobbies, interests and cultural preferences. Staff spent time to get to know people and understand their individual preferences. Their knowledge of people was reflected in how they spoke about people, giving details of people’s likes and dislikes and how they met their individual needs.  Feedback from relatives was positive. Comments included, “They treat [Name] as an individual,” “They value [Name] as a person and their achievements,” “They spoke to me about [Name]’s dislikes and likes” and “[Name]’s religion is respected.”  

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. People were supported to have choice and control over their care and make day to day decisions about all aspects of their lives. For example, people chose when to get up, what to eat and how they wanted to spend their time. Staff were respectful of these wishes. One staff member said, “I treat residents as individuals ensuring they have choice and encourage them to continue to make their choices known.” People were able to spend time with others and visitors were welcomed. Relatives told us people were supported to have choice and control over their own decisions about their care and treatment and wellbeing. The activities coordinator received high praise from people and their relatives. Comments from relatives included, “The activities coordinator is fantastic. They go around all residents individually. Staff joined in and the atmosphere was great. A real family atmosphere," “They [activities coordinator] are amazing" and “They [activities coordinator] always encourages the residents and support them with what they choose to do.”  

The provider did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. Staff monitored people’s health and wellbeing daily. We saw staff providing kind and caring support. However, we observed an occasion when staff attended to a task in a way which did not consider the person's support needs to eat their meal. At the time of the assessment, there was no activity coordinator working in the home. The home manager had made efforts to arrange cover using a familiar staff member to support continuity. Despite these efforts, we observed some people were left unengaged. One person told us, “Some staff are good at responding but some are not.” Feedback from relatives was mixed. One relative said, “[Name] always gets what they need”. However, another relative said, “They need to be supporting [Name] with their personal care more.”

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. We were assured staff were equipped with the right skills and knowledge from a robust training programme and a variety of further training opportunities in relevant areas. Staff received regular supervision, were encouraged and supported by management to enhance their skills and are given opportunities for progression. Staff members we spoke with told us they felt valued, respected and supported within their roles.