Cosford 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 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 consistently treated people with kindness and empathy. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity. People and relatives spoke very positively about staff, describing them as caring, respectful and supportive. There were strong, trusting relationships between people, staff and managers.

People experienced exceptionally warm and compassionate care from staff who knew them well and treated them with dignity and respect. Relatives consistently described staff as kind and caring. One told us, “I’m very, very happy because if it wasn’t for Cosford House I don’t think [Name] would be here today.” A person said, “There’s nothing they (staff) wouldn’t do for you. They are brilliant.” Another person commented, “Staff are all so kind.”

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.

People received highly personalised care that reflected their histories, preferences and individual identities. Staff demonstrated a strong commitment to adapting the environment and support around each person and their changing needs. Relatives told us the registered manager and staff knew people “very well” and spoke openly with them about changes and preferences.

People lived in a stable, supportive environment, including 1 person who had lived at Cosford House for over 30 years. Staff tailored activities and meaningful roles to people’s interests and strengths, for example supporting one person to exhibit and sell their artwork at community events.

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

The provider promoted people’s independence, choice and control in ways that reflected their abilities and goals. Staff supported people to cook, plan meals, manage money with support and take part in everyday tasks, helping them to do as much for themselves as possible. One relative told us, “They try to make him independent in his own way. They mostly talk to him and he tells me.”

Staff supported people to make choices about activities, routines and how support was delivered. People were actively involved in everyday choices and decisions that affected their lives. This included menu planning, activities and how shared spaces were decorated. People described choosing paint colours by writing their names on wallpaper samples and agreed they wished to be referred to as “people” rather than residents, reflecting a culture of respect and inclusion. Care plans reflected people’s interests and preferences. One recorded “I like to sing a lot and I can dance. I like shopping around” and described staff supporting the person to go out and take part in activities.

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.

Staff knew people well and generally responded promptly to changes in their mood, health or behaviour, although some supporting documentation and communication records were still being strengthened. Staff acted quickly when people’s health changed, for example bringing forward an oncologist appointment when someone developed new symptoms. When another person was in hospital staff stayed with them. One relative described how, when their family member with bipolar was “on a high or a low”, staff “get straight on the ball with them.” Staff acted to reduce distress before it occurred. One relative explained, “[Name] has something on every day, so his mind doesn’t wander off.”

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

The provider promoted staff wellbeing and fostered a positive, open culture. Staff told us they felt welcomed, valued and listened to, and described managers as approachable and supportive, including being flexible with working hours to support family life and health needs. Staff spoke positively about informal support such as ‘coffee chats’ and felt comfortable raising concerns. One staff member said, “The staff are really nice and the management are really nice. It makes me want to come to work. It’s a nice positive environment.” Staff also had access to external Human Resources advice, an employee assistance programme, and menopause and wellbeing support.