Barnet Grange 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

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 registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect.

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.

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 and their relatives spoke well of the staff at the home. Even those people and relatives who reflected some short comings with how some staff treated them, also spoke positively of the majority of staff who supported them. People and their relatives spoke of how staff treated them with care and dignity.

The provider 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.

Managers explored people’s backgrounds and preferences with them or with their relatives when people could not do this. People had individualised care plans setting out how they wanted to spend their time at the home.

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment, and well-being.

People were supported to do what they wanted with most aspects of their daily routines. People or their relatives when they were unable to express a view were consulted when staff were planning their care needs. However, we also found some people were not routinely supported to have choice and control over some aspects of their care. For example, for people who preferred to have an alcoholic beverage with their meals, and other people regarding their preferences for their medicines and types of meals they ate.

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.

Staff responded to people’s needs in relation to their care needs. Staff engaged well with those people who were living with dementia and needed someone to talk with and they provided reassurance to them throughout the day.

The provider did not always promote the wellbeing of their staff. They did not always support or enable staff to deliver person-centred care.

Staff were complimentary of their direct managers. However, there had been changes with the managers of the home and staff felt they often lacked direction from senior management. Staff in Copperfield felt disconnected to the home. They felt they were treated differently and there was a divide amongst the staff teams. The provider and previous registered managers had not addressed this issue. However, a new temporary senior manager from the provider had recently started at the home as acting manager. Staff spoke well of the impact this manager was having on defining staff roles and responsibilities. But more work was needed by the provider on these issues.