Sherwood Grange

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 received kind, caring and respectful care, that protected their privacy and dignity. People were supported to be as independent as possible and staff encouraged them to develop their independence skills. There was a culture of equality at the service, and people’s individual needs and preferences were protected. People were involved in their care and their choices were respected. However, we found that interactions between staff and people were task focused and did not always take account of people’s emotional well-being. The management team took immediate action and arranged further training to the staff team to address this concern.

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 described staff as kind, caring and respectful towards their privacy. Comments included, “They are a very nice crowd and endlessly patient”, “[Staff] are kind and thoughtful, always do their best” and “[Staff] call me by name and use a low voice if asking something personal.”

Staff treated people with respect and compassion. A staff member told us, “When we are doing personal care, we close curtains. We help the residents to choose the clothes they like and want to wear. We don’t let other people come inside during the personal care.”

Healthcare professionals working with the service felt people were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They said, “All team leaders are very caring towards the residents and treat them respectfully.” “They [staff] are kind, patient and well-spoken when addressing residents.”

People appeared well groomed and appropriately dressed. Their individual tastes were reflected in their appearance. Staff used people’s preferred names and sat at the same level when talking with people in line with good practice. However, more focus was required on people’s emotional wellbeing. Staff’s interactions with people were mostly task-focused and they had not always actively engaged with people in conversations. We saw a staff member asking a person about their food choices when supporting them to eat but there wasn’t any social conversation taking place during this time. Although we saw some cheerful interactions between people, we also noticed that some people were eating in silence. The management team took immediate action and arranged further training to the staff team to address this concern.

People felt staff were attentive to their care needs and knew them well, including their cultural and religious needs. People’s and their family members’ comments included, “[Staff] know exactly what I need and how I like things done”, “Very much so, our past lives are respected and interests known”, “We thoroughly enjoyed the church service here on Sunday and we like it that there is always someone at hand” and “Absolutely brilliant, [staff are] endlessly patient and interested in [my relative] as a person.”

People were treated as individuals by staff who understood their abilities and preferences. Staff talked to people based on their communication needs, including using simple language and short sentences which supported their understanding. A staff member told us, “Residents give us signs for what they like or dislike. We work with them for a long time and we know them. If they can't talk, we read their body language.”

There was a culture of equality at the service. People were welcomed at the home regardless of their gender, age and religious beliefs. Staff had access to information about people’s cultural and lifestyle choices, including their preference for cuisine. Festivals took place at the home to celebrate different faiths.

Staff gathered information about people to be able to understand them more. This included finding out about what was important for the person, what made them happy, how they enjoyed spending their time and any preferences they had. Information was also collected about people’s beliefs, religion and culture so staff could better support them with this.

People felt listened to and their choices were adhered to by the staff team. Comments included, “It is pretty good here, we can say what we want at our meetings and the staff are very kind and nice” and “Yes, we choose when we get up and go to bed, when we have a shower and what we eat and drink and how we spend our day.” People had a choice of activities to participate in and they enjoyed regular outings which made them feel a part of the community. A person commented, “There is a lot to do, we love the Tai Chi and the music, and I like the craft things too. And I really love the outings, we have been to the [Victoria and Albert Museum], [Kew Gardens]. Today is a river trip, it is great.”

People’s independence was encouraged which helped them to maintain their skills. Staff’s comments included, “I will ask the resident to hold their own spoon when eating if they can. I will say no, if they want me to put on their socks but they can do it themselves. I ask them nicely to try themselves” and “We do activities, and if they are good at something, we help them with that. If I am folding someone's clothes, I will get them to help me.”

People were provided with a variety of choices to meet their preferences. People were asked by staff what they wished to drink and eat, and they made choices confidently. We saw people eating in their bedrooms and they chose when they wanted to have their breakfast.

Processes were in place to support people’s changing wishes and care needs. People and their family members were involved in reviews of the care plans and care delivery. A person chosen as a ‘Resident of the day’ was discussed by the staff team, including the changes they wanted to make to their care. People had an allocated key worker to help them identify their individual care needs.

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.