Homeleigh

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

People were treated with dignity and respect. People were supported to be independent. Their needs as individuals were understood and respected. There was a good understanding of the Equality Act 2010 and its provisions were applied in practice. People had access to the community and chose how their weekly routines were planned. The activities budget had increased since the last inspection and people were supported to go out more often. Care was regularly reviewed and there was good engagement with people, their families and external professionals. We observed positive interactions between people and members of staff. Staff were patient and kind. The environment was calm and people’s needs were attended to. We spoke to 7 staff. Staff were mostly positive about the support they received. They felt valued and supported by the senior team.

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.

People told us staff knew them well, understood what was important to them and treated them with dignity and respect.

Staff told us people were treated with dignity and respect. They shared no concerns about how people were treated.

We received feedback from 3 external health and social care professionals. No concerns were expressed about the values of the staff.

We observed staff being kind to people. Staff spoke positively about the people they supported. We observed staff listening to people and communicating appropriately.

People told us staff knew them well, understood what was important to them and treated them with dignity and respect.

Staff confirmed care planning considered issues important to people such as religion or culture, for example. They were able to give specific examples about how people were supported.

Staff knew people’s needs and preferences and how to communicate with them effectively. We observed one person’s care and reviewed their care plan. Their individual needs were understood. They were content and engaged in activities throughout the inspection and we observed positive interactions with staff throughout the day.

We reviewed 3 care plans. Information was very personalised and reflected people’s wishes and preferences.

Feedback from people was mixed. People told us they were involved in their care plans and could access them if they needed to. They had choice and control over how they lived their lives but were also subject to some restrictions to help keep them safe. Some were able to go out when they wanted to. Other people, due to their support needs, had to go out with staff and said they sometimes had to wait for staff to be available.

We spoke to staff about the care and support provided to people. They gave examples about how people were supported to have control of their care. One person was supported to access independent advocacy to ensure their voice was heard and their rights were met.

Some people chose to have set routines for the week and they dictated how these were organised, as far as possible. What we observed matched what had been agreed in people’s care plans.

We reviewed all 3 care plans. People were treated as individuals and had control of their care.

People told us they were involved in discussions about any risks in their care plan and staff were quick to respond to any immediate needs.

Staff told us the staff team had sufficient numbers and the skills to meet people’s needs. Some staff mentioned staff sickness could sometimes impact on this although teamwork, consistent staff and staff being clear about their roles mitigated this.

We reviewed all 3 care plans. All 3 had clear risk assessments in place to meet people’s immediate needs. Positive behaviour support (PBS) plans were also available if required. Specialist support was available from the provider to formulate these plans and the PBS policy was person-centred. Staff knew people well and we had no concerns.

The feedback we received from staff was very positive. They felt valued by the management team and they received good support. They told us, ‘‘Yes, they have supported me well and they really look after the staff and support you’ and ‘They are brilliant, and they look after us.’

The provider had a comprehensive range of policies to support staff wellbeing. Staff also told us there was an open-door policy where the regional manager, registered manager and deputy manager were available, involved in providing care and listened to them. This helped to produce a positive working environment.