Field House Rest 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

The rating for this key question has improved. We have assessed this key question as good. The last time we inspected this key question in 2019, we rated it as required improvement.

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 confirmed they were treated with kindness. One person told us, “The staff are kind and caring.” Another person said, “They assist me with my personal care, they speak to me and treat me with dignity".

Staff understood the importance of treating people with kindness. We saw from the provider’s training matrix that all staff had completed training in topics covering privacy, dignity and respect. The manager and deputy manager completed regular 'walkarounds' of the home and this included checks that people's personal care was being provided in private. They told us they liked to meet people's families and they often 'popped' into the home at a weekend.

We spoke with health professionals who were positive about how staff treated people. One professional told us, "I can come any time, and as always, there is a happy atmosphere, and staff and residents are laughing together".

Staff interacted well with people. For example we observed staff bending down to talk with people who were seated, so staff were at the same level and able to engage better.

One person said, "Its very nice living at the home, it's quiet and peaceful, but have company if wanted." A relative told us, “The staff know how to speak to residents and know how to get the best out of them.”

Staff were positive about the home and about how people should be treated. One care staff told us, "We invite relatives to tell us about their relatives so we can support them as they want. I love looking after people that is why I came in to care as I just love looking after people. I think it is important that they have their say".

We observed people were offered a choice of care options where possible. Staff respected people's independent choices for how they wanted to live and what activities they wanted to participate in. If people chose not to engage with an activity of care, such as social activities or being hoisted; staff respected this. The activity co-ordinator was engaging with people and some people had chosen to have their nails painted. At lunch, people chose where they would like to sit. People were offered choices of meal, asked if they would like gravy with their meal, and how much they would like.

The provider had systems in place to ensure people were treated as individuals. This included care plans that were individual to the person and helped to ensure staff knew people well. Work was also underway to review the activities on offer to ensure they met people's individual preferences, the activity team had held meetings with people to identify what activities they want on the activity programme.

People gave examples of how they were supported in regard to choice and control over their own care. One person told us that if we wanted anything, we could ask; for example, I wanted a cup of tea at night, and they made me one. Another person commented, “I can have a bath if I want, and they support me with bathing.” They told us, “We do have choices if we want to get out of bed late, we can.”

Staff told us there were choices of leisure activities for people to participate in. One staff told us, "There is a pub in the garden, residents use this on a regular basis, usually on Fridays where people play dominoes and have a drink. Residents enjoy catching up with each other over a drink."

We observed people were offered a choice of care options where possible. Staff respected people's independent choices for how they wanted to live and what activities they wanted to participate in. If people chose not to engage with an activity of care, such as social activities or being hoisted; staff respected this. We observed the activity coordinator engaged with people and some people had chosen to have their nails painted. At lunch, people chose where they would like to sit. People were offered choices of meal, asked if they would like gravy with their meal, and how much they would like.

Care plans documented how people liked to receive their care and how their independence could be promoted. Staff completed best interest decisions where people lacked capacity to make their own decisions for example regarding medication or health treatments. Staff included relatives in these discussions to ensure the person's wishes were respected.

People we spoke with confirmed they were supported well by staff. One person told us, “If I ring my buzzer, they come straight away.”

Staff knew people well so could identify when they were distressed or in discomfort.

Staff were available to meet people's immediate needs. We did not see anyone having to wait for support from staff or hear buzzers sounding for excessive lengths of time.

Staff reported that they would recommend the service to be a good place to work. Staff told us they had support from management and managers worked alongside staff when needed. All staff confirmed they had regular supervision and and could always speak with managers when needed.

Systems were in place to give staff the opportunity to provide feedback, raise concerns and suggest ways to improve the service or staff experience. For example, via staff meetings and annual staff surveys. Where staff had raised issues evidence was available to show these had been considered by the provider.