Apple Tree House Residential Care Home Limited

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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

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.

The provider always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People told us staff were kind and knew them very well. One person said the best thing about living at the service was “the staff”, telling us staff were “nice” and “they respect you”. Another person said staff were “very kind, they do care for me”. One relative said, “[Name of person] is well cared for.” Another said, “[Name of person] is happy here. Staff are really good with [Name of person]”. Staff treated people with warmth, dignity and respect. Staff described how they ensured people’s privacy and dignity when they were providing support. Care plans and daily notes about people’s care were written in a dignified and professional manner.

Staff treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People were supported to have their needs met by staff who acknowledged and respected them as individuals. People with protected characteristics were fully supported to realise their needs. The decoration embraced each person as an individual. People’s individual spaces were uniquely theirs; their bedrooms had been decorated to their choosing. People were very relaxed and comfortable in communal spaces. These were decorated with items people had chosen and liked. One person described their room as “big”, and said, “It’s nice and quiet in [my] room.”

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Residents’ meetings took place where people had their say about the service. People collectively agreed, for example, what food they wanted to eat for the following week. One person told us, “We sit in the dining room every now and again to decide (the menu). Everyone usually agrees.” Each person was able to have their say and contributed equally. People chose how they wished to spend their time. People were supported into work and college courses.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

People told us staff respected their privacy and confidentiality. Interaction between people and staff were caring and compassionate. Staff were responsive to changes in people’s moods, often anticipating when they were about to become distressed, for example, and using appropriate support to comfort them. People told us staff listened to them and respected their feelings.

The provider did not always care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff.

Staff told us they were supported by the registered manager. However, staff told us they were not able to complete training in work time and felt obliged to undertake this in their own time. Recent staffing concerns meant staff often felt rushed on shift. When asked what improvements could be made a staff member said, “Being allowed time to do your training, I don’t want to do it at home, or if we were paid to do the training.”