Hawabu House

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 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 treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

The person told us staff treated them well. They said, “I love it here. Staff are the best thing about this place.” We observed interactions between the person and staff and saw they were comfortable and confident to approach staff and ask for support.

Staff shared examples with us of how they based conversations with the person on their interests and aspirations which resulted in positive engagement from them. One staff member said, “We offer lots of positive affirmation and encouragement, which [person’s name] responds well to. Care plans reflect all their preferences, and the things they enjoy discussing. When they are able to verbalise their preferences, these are added to care plans to ensure their voice is consistently captured.”

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.

The person’s preferences, cultural and religious needs were considered and documented to ensure staff supported them in a way that was considerate and respectful. Staff were knowledgeable about the person’s cultural background and the impact of their faith on their daily life. One staff member said, “Staff respect their choice and support their faith preferences. We also take their cultural and personal food preferences into account for example; we ensure meals are planned around foods they enjoy and feel comfortable eating.”

Staff told us and records showed the person was offered one to one sessions tailored to them to support their wellbeing as and when required.

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

The management team shared with us, and records confirmed, that staff had supported the person to challenge restrictions in relation to their care and support. Questions raised by the person who wanted a reduction in their level of supervision were documented by staff and they were then supported to contact the relevant authorities to request a review.

Staff told us how they supported the person to be independent. One staff member told us, “Staff also promote independence by prompting people to carry out daily living tasks such as cleaning their rooms, making their beds, washing their own plates, and helping with cooking. This supports them to become as independent as possible.”

Records showed that levels of staff supervision were used flexibly to manage risks, while also enabling independence and privacy when requested.

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.

The person’s needs were met without delay as staffing levels were planned around their individual needs. Where the person expressed concern or distress, staff were available to respond and discuss any concerns with the aim of minimising any distress. We observed occasions where the person required support from staff in making decisions or planning their day and staff were readily available to assist.

Guidance was available in the person’s care plans about what a good day looked like for them and what actions or behaviours from staff might negatively impact their day. Staff were aware of this guidance and followed it to reduce the likelihood of their actions becoming a trigger for the person.

One staff member told us, “We recognise people’s needs by closely observing their behaviour and changes in their presentation. For example, if [person’s name] mood is low, it is very noticeable. Staff approach them calmly and ask what is going on. Most of the time, verbal redirection is effective.”

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to deliver person-centred care.

Staff spoke positively about the support they received from the management team. One staff member commented, “I feel valued in my role. We have a strong management presence, and they pay attention to staff mood, wellbeing, and overall morale. Management takes staff views into consideration, and we have regular wellbeing check-ins as well as monthly supervisions.”

We reviewed records of manager’s consultations detailing actions in relation to staff support following incidents. One example of this was ‘Ensure all staff involved complete incident acknowledgement forms and debrief sessions, including psychological support if required.’ This demonstrated the management team were aware of the potential impact of incidents on staff wellbeing and signposted them to additional support where required.