Osborne Court

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.

This service scored 70 (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 in how they respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Interactions we observed were kind and caring and staff spoke to people with compassion. Staff responded immediately when people showed signs of distress and spent time communicating in an appropriate manner based on people’s communication needs. It was evident that staff had a good understanding of people’s individual needs and wishes.

We observed an activity in the children’s bungalow where staff spent time singing and dancing with people using the service. We observed genuine care from staff in ensuring people enjoyed and were engaged in the activity. One staff member commented, “We want to extend their world.”

Relatives were positive about staff and felt that they were respectful and polite. One relative told us “I trust them implicitly… they are quite special.” Another added, “Nothing is too much trouble.”

We observed a handover between one relative and the staff at the children’s service. Interactions were kind and compassionate between staff and the family of the person supported.

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.

An assessment of people’s needs and preferences was completed prior to people using the service, to ensure that staff knew people’s likes and dislikes. Interactions showed that staff were knowledgeable of people’s likes and dislikes. Staff communicated with people based on their individual communication needs and referred to people by their chosen name.

People could participate in activities of their choice. One staff member commented, “There are plenty of activities, it just depends on what they want to do.” Another told us, “Individual activities are offered for those children who don’t like group activities.”

We reviewed people’s “activities care plans” and it was documented what each person enjoys. It was documented that care plans had been made in collaboration with people and their relatives. One relative told us, “The staff know [person] very well.”

Staff at the service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Staff ensured that people’s choices were documented, and care plans are made in collaboration with relatives and people using the service. Staff promoted independence and could give examples of what each person liked to do. One staff member commented, “[Person] likes to put objects in their mouth, so we give them safe items, so they are able to do this.”

We observed people engaging in meaningful activities based on their preferences. One relative told us, “[Person] has increased in independence and squeals with excitement on their way.”

The service had a minibus to help improve access to the local community and off-site activities.

Although we observed good practice, we identified concerns with Mental Capacity Assessments and found that staff were not always working within the framework of the Mental Capacity Act, we are therefore not assured that people had choice and control over their own care and treatment.

The provider mostly 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.

Observations throughout the assessment showed that people’s immediate needs were responded to without delay. Staff approached people in a kind and caring manner.

Care plans were not always detailed in managing behaviour of those expressing distress or agitation, however staff were knowledgeable and could provide examples on how to de-escalate at times of distress. Staff could describe the signs of distress to look out for when people could not communicate verbally.

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

The provider had a range of benefits, including access to staff wellbeing support and staff equality and diversity networks.

Staff told us they felt valued and supported by the management team. One staff member commented, “I came here and I wanted to stay, it was the first time I didn’t want to move around to other jobs.”