Paisley Court

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

We assessed all 5 quality statements in the caring key question and found some areas of good practice and some areas which required improvement. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. Our rating for this key question remains good. Overall staff treated people with kindness and compassion. We observed staff mostly comforting people and providing them with reassurance when they were distressed or upset. Visitors were welcomed and supported to spend quality time with their relatives. Some people’s personal records and personal items were not stored in a way that promoted their privacy and dignity. We received positive feedback from family members about people’s immediate needs being met in a timely way. However, we observed some examples where responses to people’s immediate needs were delayed. Managers took immediate action to ensure people’s dignity after we raised it with them.

This service scored 65 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Family members who we spoke with on behalf of people told us staff were kind and treated their relative with compassion and dignity. Their comments included, “I can visit anytime” “Generally treated well very and always very courteous to me”, “Staff are brilliant with [relative], always make sure she is kept tidy” and “Staff treat my [relative] really well.”

Staff told us they cared about the people living at Paisley Court. Their comments included, “Treat them [people] like family”, “I know people well, it takes time to get to know people and I love this job and the people” “Most of the staff work well, and make sure people come first” and “The way you approach residents.”

Visiting professionals told us staff were kind and caring. Their comments included, “Feel they are caring” and “Staff are amazing.”

We observed examples of staff providing people with care and support in a kind and caring way. For example, we observed examples where staff comforted and reassured people who were upset and staff ensured bedroom and bathroom doors were closed when supporting people with personal care. We did however observe some practices which undermined people’s confidentiality and dignity. For example, we saw people’s personal records left unsupervised on a table in a communal lounge, placing people’s confidentiality at risk. A person was sat in an easy chair which was ripped, stained and malodorous. We also observed some people’s personal items stored in a communal sideboard such as spectacles and hairbrushes.

Family members who we spoke with on behalf of people told us they felt their relative was treated as an individual. Family members told us they could visit their relative when they liked and their relative was offered a range of activities. Their comments included, “I can visit anytime”, “Can visit when I want but I do avoid mealtimes and bedtimes." “[Relative] is encouraged wherever possible and is involved in activities and goes in garden”, “Last went for afternoon tea in Sefton Gardens with staff it was beautiful” and “[Relative] doesn’t go out or take part in activities very often but this is often through their own choice, depending on their mood.”

Staff described to us how they supported people’s individual needs. Their comments included, “Each resident is very different, relationships with them are what makes the difference, appreciating people’s diversity and needs” and "I know people really well, we take time to get to know people.” Staff did however tell us, “People have to wait sometimes because they don’t have their own sling (hoist)” and “Lots of people are sharing the same shower chair.” We discussed the use of shared equipment with managers, and they assured us this was being addressed.

We observed people receiving visits from their family members at various times throughout the day. We observed managers and staff welcoming visitors and offering them refreshments. Visitors were seen choosing where they spent time with their relative. People’s bedrooms were personalised with items of importance to them including photographs, pictures and ornaments. People were offered a choice of food, drinks and snacks. People had use of adaptive equipment including chairs, handrails, baths, toilets and showers.

Assessment and care planning processes were used to identify people’s needs and choices and they were kept under review. Handover meeting took place at the beginning of each shift to share information and updates about people’s needs and their progress. Daily care notes were completed for each person detailing a personalised account of the events and the care delivered to them on each shift. Aspects of people’s care such was as food and fluid intake and repositioning was monitored and records were maintained and reviewed to make sure people received the right level of care and support in line with their individual needs.

Family members who we spoke with on behalf of people told us staff promoted their relative’s independence and offered them choice. Their comments included, “[Relative] is encouraged all the time to be as independent as possible and make their own choices”, “Always ensure [relatives] wishes to feed herself” and “[Relative] is encouraged wherever possible and is involved in activities.”

Staff described how they promoted independence and choice for people. Their comments included, “I always try to get people to do as much for themselves as they can”, “People get choices I feel I know the residents really well”, “Activities coordinator comes in and does karaoke, drawing, colouring all enjoy and encouraged to get involved.” Staff explained how they supported people to make choices using nonverbal methods including the use of pictures. A staff member told us, “Offer people who 2-3 different meals allow them to try and if not like will change. Drinks choices also have pictures to show options.”

Adaptive equipment was located around the home to assist people’s independence. This included handrails and adapted bathrooms. People had use of personal adaptive equipment such as personalised easy chairs. People also had aids to help them mobilise around the home independently including Zimmer frames and walking sticks. People were observed using adapted equipment for eating and drinking including adapted cups and cutlery. Wheelchairs and hoists were used to support people to move around the home safely. Staff were observed supporting people to make choices such as how they spent their time, where they sat, meals and drinks.

The initial assessment of people’s needs identified people’s communication needs, their level of independence and the support they needed to make choices and decisions about their care and support. Care plans were developed based on the initial assessment and provided clear guidance for staff on how best to support and promote people’s independence, choice and communication and they were regularly reviewed. Menus were available in different formats to assist people to make choices about meals.

Family members who we spoke with on behalf of people told us they felt staff responded well to their relatives’ immediate needs. A relative described how staff acted quickly following an injury their relative experienced and they told us the staff really looked after their relative. Another family member described a, “Very quick response” when their relative was unwell. Other comments made by family members included, “If ever unwell staff act very quickly” and “Yes very quick and on the ball,”

Staff told us they did their best to respond to people’s immediate needs, however they commented that sometimes this was difficult because of a shortage of equipment. Their comments included, “One of the hoists is out of service, have to share a shower chair with units, needs one or two on each unit”, “People run out pads very often” and “People have to wait, people do not have their own sling sometimes. People are sharing the same shower chair.” We discussed the use of shared equipment with managers, and they assured us this was being addressed.

In the main we observed staff responding quickly to people’s immediate needs; however, we observed examples when responses were delayed impacting on people’s comfort and wellbeing. For example, a person was left sat in the lounge in their wheelchair whilst staff where busy carrying out none care tasks. Another person was unable rest on their bed in the afternoon as it was unmade, and another person did not receive timely support from staff when they experienced a period of unsettlement.

Staff told us they did not always feel valued, listened to and supported in their role. Their comments included, “The morale is bad, the managers just don’t want to know, we just feel like they don’t care about us”, “Sometimes the managers can be defensive when we raise things” and “Team dynamics could be improved and staffing levels, the managers don’t listen when we raise this.”

There was a supervision and appraisal process in place and staff meetings were held. However, records showed supervision and staff meetings were infrequent. Minutes from staff meetings lacked focus on praise and or acknowledgment for their work. During the assessment we did not see any evidence of staff wellbeing initiatives or reward programmes or staff surveys. Following the assessment the registered manager provided evidence of wellbeing initiatives and reward programmes they had introduced following the assessment site visits.