Ranvilles Nursing & Residential Care Home

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

We only looked at the quality statement of ‘Treating people as individuals’ in this key question at this assessment. Relatives told us staff understood people’s individual needs and supported them accordingly. The feedback staff provided demonstrated they knew how to treat people as individuals, but our observations identified this was variable amongst the team. Activities were in place but needed to be more personalised to people to enhance wellbeing.

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.

We did not look at Kindness, compassion and dignity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

Relatives told us people’s individual needs and preferences were understood and these were reflected in their care, treatment, and support. Comments included, “Staff have understood my mum's complex mental and physical health needs well, adapting the provision in the home to best meet her needs.” Mum has enjoyed access to a range of activities and visitors, including those from faith groups. She particularly enjoys craft, radio, music and the themed days.”

Staff told us how they treated people as individuals. For example, 1 staff member said, “Each resident has a different culture, background, life choices, likes and dislikes, so it’s about applying this to their needs and treating them in the way they want to be treated. It’s all about delivering person-centred care and doing things in their best interest. For example, if one resident is on a vegetarian diet, I will respect this and follow that for the resident, I am not going to assume that everyone else likes a vegetarian diet. Not respecting their choices could make them unhappy or distressed.”

The way staff engaged with people varied amongst the team. In some instances, people’s care and support was individualised to them and it was clear staff understood their individual needs. Examples included, 1 person being supported to make choices with the aid of pictorial cards and another staff member engaging a person with a personalised activity to support their wellbeing. However, on another occasion, we noted that when a person became upset, they were not supported in a way that improved their wellbeing. We also observed times where staff who were offering 1:1 support for people did not engage with them in a meaningful way. We saw the activities board which demonstrated a lack of individualised activities for people. For example, ‘going out in the garden’ was an activity for 1 afternoon rather than when people wanted to. The registered manager told us they had started to use a resource to improve activities for people.

The provider had robust policies in place to support the provision of providing individualised care to people. For example, ‘The Accessible Information Standard’ which provided a framework for staff to effectively communicate with people with a disability, impairment, or sensory loss. Processes such as providing 1:1 care and activities for people were in place but needed improvement to ensure these were more personalised for people. For example, activity coordinators only worked until 3pm on weekdays. This did not account for people who became more unsettled in the afternoons and evenings due to sundowning. Sundowning is a term used in relation to people with dementia when they experience changes in behaviour such as increased anxiety and agitation that occur later in the day. People’s care records mostly took account of their individual needs and preferences, were understood by staff, and reflected their required care, treatment, and support.

We did not look at Independence, choice and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.