Care Outlook (West Wickham)

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 the last inspection the rating for this key question was good. At this inspection the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant staff were not always caring and people were not always treated with compassion and dignity.

This service scored 65 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People and their relatives told us that staff were caring and treated them with kindness and compassion and respected people’s dignity and treated them with respect. One person said, “[Staff] are very kind and treat me with dignity and respect.” Another person said, “Yes, the carers help me with privacy and dignity.”

A relative said, “[Staff] are very patient and gentle with [person]. “Another relative said, “The carers are very kind to [person].” A third relative said, “Privacy and dignity are well maintained. The door is closed. Nobody can see what [staff] are doing.”

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds.

We saw that where people had stipulated their faith or were from a particular culture, the care planning process did not always explore or consider any potential culture needs that people required support with.

Staff had received equality and diversity training and were able to describe how they respected people equally.

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

People and their relatives we spoke with expressed they were happy overall with the care provided. However, care records were not comprehensive in always documenting how care needs took account of people’s preferences and wishes in relation to independence a person-centred way. The manager told us they would update people’s care plans where required. We will check this at our next inspection.

The provider did not always listen to and understand people’s needs and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. People and relatives told us staff were often not staying for the full length of the visit

One person said, “I have not had a missed call, but [staff] don’t always stay the full time.” Another person said, “A few months ago a manager from the office had to come out and wash me. I should have 2 carers to help me, but they seem to have broken their own rules.”

Although the provider monitored the ECM system, they did not monitor the length of call visits.

Staff told us they could raise any concerns, and they were confident they would be addressed by the manager. The culture of the service promoted positive well-being through inclusivity, and open conversations. People were supported by staff who felt valued by their leaders and their colleagues.

Staff we spoke with told us they felt supported by the manager. Staff comments included, “The [manager] is very good.” Another staff member said, “The [manager] is good and acts on any concerns I have.” A third staff member said, “Very nice manager, listens and is not biased.”