Marsh Farm Manor Care 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

We reviewed all of the quality statements in this key question.

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.

Staff told us they thought the team at the service worked together well and they had support from visiting healthcare professionals were needed. Staff told us they enjoyed working at the service caring for people.

We observed staff were caring and respectful of people’s privacy and dignity. Staff knocked on people’s doors before going into their rooms and communicated with people effectively. We observed staff were caring in their approach and took time to listen and communicate with people.

People told us staff were kind and caring and supported them in a respectful and dignified way. Comments from people about the staff included, “The staff are wonderful, I can’t fault them at all” and “All the staff are lovely, they are all very kind.”

The provider shared feedback with us they had received from visiting professionals which was complimentary about the approach of the staff.

There were systems to make sure people’s needs were recorded and staff had access to care plans and guidance. Newsletters were produced and shared with people giving them information on activities and events at the service. The provider organised for a regional activity person to visit the home regularly to support activities staff with planning and ideas for engagement.

People’s preferences were known by staff. One person told us, “The staff are so good, it is a two-way thing. They [staff] make the effort to get to know you and we, in turn, get the chance to get to know them.” People were able to engage with their local community and take part in activities they enjoyed.

The registered manager told us staff took time to get to know people and understand their needs. Families were asked information about people’s life history if people were not able to share this themselves. They told us staff supported people to live as they wanted and did not label people.

We observed people taking part in activities in the home and also being supported by staff on a 1-1 basis. There was information available on notice boards which outlined activities available each day. People were able to spend their time as they wished. Some people preferred their own company in their own rooms which was respected by staff.

People told us they were encouraged to do as much for themselves as possible, they felt staff promoted their independence. People spoke positively about the staff and their approach. People could have visitors when they wished with no restrictions. One relative told us, “I cannot fault them [staff] and whenever I have visited the home, I have been made welcome every single time.”

We observed people being supported to make their own choices in different ways. For example, people with dementia were shown meal options on plates to help them choose their meals.

Personalised care plans were in place which recorded people’s needs and wishes. Where people gave consent families were also asked to contribute to the care planning process. Systems were in place to support visits from friends and family. The registered manager told us they were keen to work with families as much as possible.

Staff gave us examples of how they supported people to maintain their independence as much as possible. Staff told us they also encouraged people to make their own choices and do as much for themselves as they were able.

People who experienced distressed reactions had detailed guidance recorded for staff to support them in a timely way. People told us they found the staff were compassionate. One person said, “The staff here are very good in terms of their empathy particularly.”

We observed people being supported by staff who had time to engage with them. Staff demonstrated they knew people well and how to provide person-centred care. We observed the atmosphere in the service was relaxed and the approach of the staff was friendly.

Staff told us they had time to talk with people and they were aware of people’s needs. There were daily handovers where staff could talk about people’s needs and any changes needed in care and support. The registered manager told us they were assured staff were responding to people promptly. They said, “We expect the staff to sit with people and involve people in activities. We support staff to find out triggers to behaviour and what action to take. I tell staff if they are struggling to contact any of the management, don’t struggle on your own.”

This assessment was prompted in part by whistleblowing concerns we received about the approach of the registered manager towards staff. During this assessment we have not found any evidence to substantiate any concerns. Staff told us they felt well supported by the registered manager and the provider. Staff felt able to approach management at any time and share any concerns about their wellbeing. One member of staff told us, “I do feel really supported, there is always someone available to us.”

The provider had evaluated their resources during the COVID-19 pandemic and recognised the impact of the wellbeing of staff. The district manager told us the provider had different systems to make sure staff were supported. This included an electronic application on individual telephones where staff could access a GP if they needed it, a free and confidential telephone helpline and support such as discounts on shopping and a monthly staff magazine signposting to different support resources. The provider showed us their internal intranet page which signposted staff to various support and information resources. For example, the provider produced various ‘podcasts’ on topics around diversity and inclusion.