Cherrycroft

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

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. We assessed a total of 5 quality statements from this key question. We have combined the scores for these areas with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was requires improvement. At this assessment this key question has changed to good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

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 and relatives were positive about the kindness shown to them by staff. A person told us, “I love it here and the staff are kind. There is one member of staff in particular who always goes above and beyond. I don’t know what we would do without them.” Another person said, “Staff are so lovely, and they do try their best.” Another relative told us, “Overall I do feel the majority of staff respect my [family members] privacy and dignity.”

Staff we spoke with were positive about their relationship with people. A staff member said, “I feel happy supporting people, I want them to feel at home and give people physical and emotional support.”

We received positive feedback from health professionals. A health professional told us, "The staff are very kind and caring."

We observed numerous positive interactions between staff and people who used the service.

People’s individual needs and preferences were understood, and these were reflected in their care, treatment and support. People were supported to maintain relationships with others.

Staff told us they worked hard to support people and meet their individual needs.

Throughout the assessment we observed staff supporting people sensitively and staff practice was positive. Staff demonstrated their awareness of people's likes and dislikes.

People received care that was individual and personalised to their needs. We saw from care records that people had care plans in place which were inclusive of people’s views and wishes. This enabled staff to support them in the way they wished to be supported to live full and active lives.

People were given choices throughout the day. Staff asked people what they wanted to eat or drink and what activities they wanted to take part in. Staff had a good understanding of how to support people to make day to day decisions. However, some relatives felt the activities were not meaningful and there was not always something for everyone to take part in.

Staff knew people well and how they wished to be supported. Staff understood people’s rights and worked with them as individuals to promote positive outcomes. Activities were supported and staff encouraged people to find ways to spend their time constructively doing activities they wanted to do. Where people had family, they were supported to maintain contact with their family.

Throughout the visit, we observed people moving around the service freely, staff involved people in their care and treatment, offering choices where possible.

Care plans contained information for staff to promote people’s independence in areas such as mobility, communication and risk. Regular resident meetings were held with people to discuss any changes or suggestions. People had access to a varied activity programme.

Most people and relatives told us they were happy with how staff responded to their requests for support. However, we did receive feedback a concern had not been responded to. This was discussed with the regional manager who took appropriate action.

The regional manager acknowledged there was some communication barriers between relatives and senior staff required some additional support with identifying concerns and responding promptly. The management team had responded positively, and additional support was now in place.

Throughout our onsite assessment we observed staff responding to people promptly.

Staff felt well supported working at the service and found it to be a positive experience for them.

The regional manager and registered manager had a number of systems in place to support and engage with staff. There was an open-door policy in the office and staff could access the office at any time to speak to management.