Burntwood Lodge

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 this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

This service scored 50 (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 did not always treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion, or respect their privacy and dignity.

We observed one occasion where a member of staff was standing over a person whilst supporting them to eat. This approach did not promote dignity, choice or a person-centred experience and could be perceived as task-focused rather than supportive. We also noted that some clothing protectors used during mealtimes appeared worn, aged and undignified in appearance. Whilst these items may have supported people to protect their clothing, their condition and presentation did not always promote a positive or dignified dining experience.

People were supported by staff who were, in many instances, kind, caring and responsive to their needs. Relatives fed back that staff were caring towards their loved ones. One relative told us, “She’s the happiest she can be, they look after very well. They treat her with lots of respect.”

During the inspection, we observed positive interactions between staff and people using the service. Staff responded promptly when people became upset or distressed, offering reassurance, comfort and emotional support.

People were supported to dress well. Clothing was clean, suitable for the weather and reflected people's individual preferences. This demonstrated that staff supported people to maintain their personal appearance and promoted their dignity. One member of staff said, “We always make sure the doors shut [when giving personal care], this is their home and you have to respect that. You don’t shout you respect their property. We don’t talk about things in front of anyone else.”

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 and protected characteristics.

The provider did not always demonstrate a person-centred approach to supporting people to live fulfilling and meaningful lives. One person told us, “A few times I get bored.” Things for people to do were limited and were not always tailored to people's individual interests, goals, preferences and aspirations. On the whole, people primarily accessed day centre services, with limited evidence of a wider range of personalised opportunities being considered or offered. Whilst attendance at day centres may have been appropriate and beneficial for some people, leaders could not demonstrate that this approach was sufficiently individualised or that alternative opportunities had been explored to ensure people experienced choice and control over how they spent their time.

Relatives fed back that they appreciated some of the activities their loved ones participated in. One told us, “He’s happy, they take care of him, he’s always got something to do, he’s either at the day centre or going shopping or going to a restaurant. They have always got something for him to do.”

The provider recognised some aspects of people's individuality and personal preferences. People's bedrooms were personalised and reflected their interests, preferences and personalities. We saw people had chosen how their rooms were arranged, which helped create a familiar and comfortable living environment and promoted a sense of identity and ownership. A relative told us, “The home is very nice just having extensions work now but will be nice when it’s done. The place is nice; [person’s] room is always nicely arranged.”

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People were not always supported to have meaningful choice and control over how they lived their lives. Whilst staff knew people well and supported them with their day-to-day needs, opportunities for people to make decisions about their social lives and leisure activities were limited.

We found people did not routinely have opportunities to choose to go out during the evening. One member of staff said, “Since working here [people] never go out in the evening.” People were not always supported to access community activities, social events or pursue personal interests at times that reflected their preferences. This reduced assurance that people were being supported to live full and active lives and exercise choice over how they spent their time outside of the home.

We also observed that one person regularly dominated decisions about what was watched on the television in communal areas. There was limited evidence that arrangements were in place to ensure everyone had equal opportunities to express their preferences and make choices regarding shared activities.

However, people were able to move freely around the home and access all areas available to them. This supported people's independence and enabled them to use communal and private spaces within the service according to their preferences.

.
 

The provider did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

The provider did not always ensure people's needs, views and wishes were listened to, understood and responded to appropriately. Whilst some positive interactions were observed, staff practice was not consistently person-centred and did not always promote people's emotional wellbeing.

We observed one person wearing their cardigan inside out. Despite raising this with the registered manager, they did not take steps to discreetly check whether the person was aware of this or whether they would like support to correct it.

We also observed a member of staff chastise a person when they displayed a distressed reaction to an event. The staff member's response did not demonstrate an understanding of the person's emotional experience and risked increasing the person's distress rather than providing reassurance and support. Whilst this observation was not representative of all interactions seen during the inspection, it demonstrated that staff did not always respond in ways that reflected people's individual needs, views and wishes.

We observed positive examples of staff responding to people's emotional needs. On one occasion, a person became upset and started crying. A member of staff responded promptly, offering reassurance and comfort in a calm and caring manner.

The provider did not always care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff. They did not always support or enable staff to deliver person-centred care.

Staff felt that management did not always recognise the impact such incidents had on their wellbeing or provide sufficient support following the event. One told us, “[Registered manager] won’t say he will look into it the incident.” The registered manager also confirmed that they did not routinely undertake debriefs after incidents.

However, most staff spoke positively about working at the service and told us their wellbeing was considered by management. Staff described feeling supported in their roles and said they were able to approach managers for advice and guidance when required. One member of staff said, “In here, to be honest, this is my second family, everyone is really helpful. If I ask them anything they will help me.” This demonstrated that the provider had taken some steps to promote staff wellbeing and provide support within the workplace.