Quinton 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

People were supported to have choice and control and make decisions about how their support was provided. However, they were not always encouraged by staff to improve their independence. People were not always encouraged to take part in a wide range of activities both at the service and in the community to ensure they lived a fulfilled life. Staff supported people in a timely manner.

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.

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.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

Staff did not always understand person centred care. Staff we spoke to spoke about people as a group. The registered manager stated “They like to do things together” but it was unclear from reviewing care records how they had determined this. We found that staff supported people to undertake activities which took place both in and outside the home as a group rather than individually. The registered manager fed back they had wanted to take people on holiday but had been prohibited from doing so by the provider. There had been no discussion with people, their families or staff as to why this decision had been made. This meant people’s independence, choice and control was not always respected by the provider. The registered manager displayed a determined attitude and discussed in detail the experiences they hoped to support people with in the next year.

People told us their care plans were developed with them. People told us, “I do loads on my own and sometimes with the others. I can do what I want to do. They don’t tell me to do anything, sometimes they suggest things and I say, ‘yes’ or ‘no’.” Relatives we spoke with told us there were relatives were supported to take part in some activities such as going for a walk and going to see the trains. However, one relative told us people had not been holiday since before the COVID-19 pandemic and there relative, “Would jump at the chance to go on holiday.”

We observed staff to prompt people to be independent. For example, we observed staff to encourage a person to obtain the things they needed to go out in the cold weather. We did however observe some instances as detailed in the safeguarding section of this assessment whereby people asked for staff’s permission to obtain food and to leave certain rooms.

Whilst people’s choices and preferences were included in their care plans, these were not regularly reviewed. For example, a document name ‘mapping the future together' had been completed but there was no date which detailed when this was completed, and this had not been reviewed. We found people had expressed wishes to undertake certain experiences such as holidays and the desire to live independently one day. We found no evidence any further discussion or planning had taken place to ensure people’s independence was respected and promoted. Care plans detailed people’s likes and dislikes and some care plans reflected how staff should support people. For example, one person enjoyed watching trains and care plans detailed how staff should support them to undertake this hobby.

People told us they did not wait long for support. People told us they didn’t need a lot of physical support but if they needed help staff would help them. For example, a person we spoke with said, “If I need someone they are there. Like when I need the olive oil putting in my ear. I don’t need a lot of help; I can make my drinks myself and tidy up.” Relatives told us, staff were responsive to people’s needs as they knew them well. A relative we spoke with said, “Staff are really on it, they know [name] very well.”

Staff we spoke with knew people well and the level of support they needed. Staff told us, during the night people knew to wake them if they needed anything. The registered manager knew people very well and spoke in detail about the support they provided to one person with continence needs. They discussed staff anticipated some of their needs in regards to prompting using the toilet and the benefit this had on the person.

The staff member was respectful and polite to people throughout the day. However, the incidents regarding the ‘cup of tea’ and ‘chocolate’ could possibly indicate a restrictive approach to care and support. We had limited observations and only one person required minimal physical support. We did not observe people to have to wait for support as both people were physical independent and required prompting only. One person who wanted to go to their room went immediately upon asking staff to help.

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.