Chesterton Lodge

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 provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated requires improvement: This meant people did not always feel well-supported and actively engaged. However, people felt cared for and treated with dignity and respect.

This service scored 55 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider treated people with kindness and respected their privacy and dignity. However, people and staff told us care was often rushed and task focused. People told us and we observed staff promoting people’s dignity and privacy, such as staff knocking on people’s bedroom doors before entering. One person said, "Staff always knock on the door before coming in.” Relatives told us staff supported people respectfully and professionally. However, whilst people’s health and support needs were addressed promptly and professionally by staff, we observed limited amounts of meaningful engagement throughout periods of the first site visit. During the second site visit, there were numerous activities. Although, we noted this was due to a weekly visit from the provider’s wellbeing ambassador, who focused on activities and people’s wellbeing. The manager told us about their plans to increase daily activities and social engagement. Staff told us they cared for people and upheld their dignity; they gave us examples of knocking on people's doors before entering and supporting people's dignity during personal care. However, staff shared their frustration over not being able to spend time with people and engage in social activities. One staff member said, “I feel I am rushing; I feel it’s not caring. We haven’t got time to talk to people.” Another staff member said, “Due to needs of people, it feels more like a conveyor belt. There is not enough time to interact with people.” However, staff did comment that when activities did take place, people appeared to engage and enjoy them. One staff member said, “There are some set activities, such as reminiscence activities, ball games, cards, general chit chat and so on. We [staff] do these when we can. The cinema suite is often used." The manager told us about their plans to increase daily activities and social engagement such as involving more community groups.

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s health care, and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. However, the provider did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities and unique backgrounds. One person told us, "It’s okay but a bit on the boring side, there is nothing much to do." Relatives told us they were concerned over the lack of interaction and mental stimulation. One relative said, "People just sit here all-day watching TV except on Wednesdays when someone comes in and runs a café etc.” Staff knew people well and could tell us about people's needs without referring to care plans. However, staff told us they did not have time to promote people's individual hobbies and interests. One staff member said, “Activities are not possible in the morning due to all the care tasks, sometimes we can do something in the afternoon.” Another staff member told us they often needed to stop an activity with people to carry out care tasks, they said, “It means the activity is stop / start, so the person loses interest.” People's care plans were specific to people's needs. Where people expressed preferences, such as having a specific gender of staff to support them with personal care, this was clearly recorded. However, where care plans detailed people previously enjoyed individual hobbies, it was not clear how these were being promoted.

The provider promoted people’s independence. People had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. However, improvements were needed to ensure people were offered regular choices around their social care needs. People told us staff supported them to maintain their health independence. One person told us how staff supported them to manage their own continence aids. However, people told us they did not have enough to do or keep themselves occupied in the day. One person said, "There are no activities. There’s nothing to do here, no entertainment. These sorts of places are supposed to keep your brain going, but not here.” A relative told us, “My family member doesn’t like the TV, it’s always blaring in the lounges, but no one is watching it. My family member needs more encouragement otherwise; they will just sit in their bedroom.” Staff told us they respected peoples’ choices and encouraged people to do as much as they could for themselves. However, staff told us they had limited time to engage with people and encourage them to develop and maintain their interests and skills. Care plans detailed people’s choices even when these choices went against health professionals’ advice and recommendations. The provider recognised people retained the right to make their own decisions and these were respected. Care plans detailed strategies to promote people’s independence, such as supporting themselves with their personal care. However, there was limited information regarding how people's independence skills such as cooking, cleaning and maintaining their interests were being actively promoted.

Improvements were needed to ensure staff consistently responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. People told us staff responded quickly when needed to any concerns over health or wellbeing. Observations found staff catered for people's health needs promptly. When people requested or needed assistance staff responded professionally. Staff told us how they would respond to emergencies such as falls or when people presented as being unwell. However, where people appeared bored and restless, or struggled to complete a task, staff were often busy carrying out other tasks. Although, when staff did interact with people, they did so kindly. The provider responded to our feedback by increasing observations of staff interaction and sharing their plans to increase daily activities. Care plans detailed how to respond to people in emergencies. However, some care plans required further details to clearly record how to respond to people when they experienced distressed emotions. The provider responded to our feedback by updating the documentation.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff. Staff told us they received support from the management team. One staff member told us, "The manager supports me, they’ve been brilliant with my [personal issue]." We saw evidence of a colleague advice telephone line in the office. The provider nominated staff for awards for going above and beyond.