High Meadows

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 service was caring. People wanted more opportunities for social and leisure activities. The provider was aware of this and was making improvements in this area. People told us they were able to make choices. Although some people felt staff did not always act on these and needed clearer guidance, for example around food choices. People and their relatives told us they were involved in planning and reviewing their care, but their involvement was not always clearly recorded. People were treated with kindness and respect. They had good relationships with staff. Their privacy was respected. People were supported to do things for themselves and be independent when they wanted and needed. Staff were well treated and felt they had the support they needed. We did not assess all the quality statements within this key question. We did not identify concerns relating to those areas which we judged as being met at our last inspection.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People told us they were treated with respect, compassion and kindness. They said they had good relationships with staff and their r privacy and dignity were respected. People could make choices about the gender of the staff supporting them with intimate personal care.

Staff spoke about the people they cared for with fondness. They knew them well and respected their individual personalities. Thet were able to explain how they provided personalised care.

External professionals told us they had observed staff treating people in a caring way.

We saw staff being gentle and respectful. They addressed people using their preferred names and pronouns. They explained what they were doing and gave people time to make decisions. They were discreet and sensitive when providing care.

Some improvements were needed to ensure people had a good choice of food and activities. Whilst people told us they were asked to make choices, some people told us they wanted more choices at mealtimes, or that the staff did not always understand the choices they had made regarding food. People told us there were not always enough planned social and leisure activities. They enjoyed the activities and special events which they took part in but felt more needed to be organised. We discussed these issues with the registered manager who agreed to investigate.

The registered manager told us they were in the process of recruiting staff to plan, organise and facilitate activities. They explained that in the meantime, all staff were involved in facilitating leisure activities.

We saw people were offered choices and staff respected these. However games and leisure activities which took place on the day of our visit were limited and did not always consider the individual needs of people using the service. We explained this to the registered manager so they could address this with staff.

People’s views and consultation had not always been recorded in care plans and reviews. Sstaff had created care plans for each person. These included personalised goals and plans for how they wanted to be cared for. Whilst people and their relatives told us they had been consulted when care plans were reviewed, this was not always well recorded. We discussed this with the registered manager so they could make sure people’s views and opinions were recorded in care plans. There were some organised events which people enjoyed and had given positive feedback about. The provider also organised some trips out.. The registered manager told us they hoped there would be better coordination and organisation around daily leisure activities once they recruited specialist staff to this role.

Staff told us they enjoyed working at the service. They said they were well supported and there was good teamwork.

The provider supported staff with their wellbeing. Staff had regular meetings with their managers, both individually and with each other. These were used to discuss the service as well as their individual needs, training requirements and career development. Nurses received managerial but not clinical supervision. Clinical supervision is a formal process of professional support, reflection and learning that contributes to individual development. This was raised with the registered manager so they could ensure nurses receive both types of supervision for their own wellbeing and to ensure best practice is followed.