Yarborough House RCH

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 remained requires improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

The provider was in breach of legal regulations in relation to person-centred care and staffing.

This service scored 40 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Due to the concerns identified during the assessment, we could not be assured that people consistently received high-quality, compassionate care that upheld their dignity and rights.

People were supported by kind, caring and dedicated staff. However, their ability to provide good quality care was impacted by staffing levels which were determined by the provider. Staff described low staffing levels and told us, “I don’t feel like we’re meeting people’s needs.” Another said “I love my job and I love the people” but then went on to say “Everyday there’s not enough time to do what we need to do for people. Care is delayed and there’s no baths for people.”

People provided positive feedback about the approach of staff and their caring nature. People told us, “Staff are fantastic, there's just not enough of them” and “Staff are nice. I have a laugh with them.” Relatives told us staff are “Kind caring and supportive” and “Kind, friendly and approachable. My [relative] speaks to a lot of the staff there and gets on very well with them They work hard.” Another said, “It would be good if staff had more time to chat to people."

People were not treated as individuals, and their care and support needs were not met. We found people’s basic care needs of showering, washing and oral hygiene were not consistently met.

People did not receive appropriate emotional and social stimulation. One person said, “I haven't done any activities. [Staff] don't come and talk. I get lonely.” An activities co-ordinator had been recruited since the last assessment. However, this was only for 5 hours per week and we could not be assured that this would support the social needs of all people. We found people who were cared for in bed did not receive sufficient stimulation and were isolated which had the potential to negatively impact their mental wellbeing.

People were not always supported to have choice and control over how they spent their time or to maximise their independence. Some people, particularly those who spent long periods in their rooms or remained in bed, were not always offered opportunities for meaningful social interaction, maintaining relationships or pursuing interests that were important to them.

Opportunities to promote independence were also missed. For example, one person told us they had managed their own medicines before moving to the service. However, staff had assumed responsibility for administering their medicines and had not explored whether they wished, or were able, to continue managing them independently.

Whilst we identified these shortfalls, relatives gave examples of staff knowing people well and supporting them to make day-to-day choices in ways that reflected their preferences and individual needs. A relative said, “[Name] finds it difficult to make choices, but through knowing them well they helped [Name] make choices by giving options and providing things they like."

People did not receive appropriate support to meet their needs in a timely manner. Staff told us checks on people’s safety and wellbeing and care were provided late as there were not enough staff. Staffing levels were insufficient to allow staff to safely monitor the whereabouts of people who tried to leave the service and to provide support and reassurance if people displayed feelings of anxiety or distress.

An effective system was not fully in place to promote the wellbeing of staff. We received mixed feedback from staff about how their wellbeing was supported. Whilst staff spoke positively about the support they received from the registered manager and acknowledged flexibility to accommodate personal circumstances, some staff felt their concerns, particularly in relation to staffing levels, had not been adequately addressed. This resulted in mixed experiences of staff wellbeing and support. A staff member told us, “If we were valued, we wouldn’t be begging for more staff on the floor. On hot days [the registered manager] gets us drinks and treats, but the [provider] no. They used to but I don’t know what’s changed."