Stonedale Lodge 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

People did not always receive person centred care to meet their needs, and their privacy, dignity, choice and independence was not always respected and promoted. People did not receive the care and support they needed to maintain their personal hygiene, including hair, nail and skin care. Staff routinely used a person’s bedroom to provide hair care to other people and to store communal hairdressing equipment without the person’s consent. People experienced unnecessary pain and discomfort as staff failed to respond to their calls for assistance. Family members were not always made to feel welcome or offered refreshments, a family member told us it depended on which staff were on shift. Some people who preferred to eat in the dining room with others were served their meals from a side table in the lounge because there were insufficient dining facilities to accommodate them. Staff removed meals and drinks from people without engaging with them or attempting to provide the prompting and encouragement the person needed to promote their independence in line with their care plan. There was a lack of opportunities for people to take part in activities both in and outdoors. People and family members described some staff as kind and caring. We observed examples where staff used effective techniques to comfort and reassure people when they were anxious and upset.

This service scored 35 (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 most of the staff were kind and caring, their comments included, “The staff are nice and do their best” and “The staff are caring.” People felt there were few opportunities to get out and about, their comments included, “I don’t get out much, [family member] takes me out sometimes” and “I just sit in a chair all day watching television.” Family members told us they were not always made to feel welcome and there was lack of activities for their relatives to get involved in. Their comments included, “We are just let in and left to find [relative]. Sometimes offered a cup of tea, it depends which staff are on shift.” Other family members told us, “We never get offered a cup of tea,” “There is no entertainment. We saw some of the residents being walked outside once but only once.”

Staff provided examples of how they treated people with kindness and respected their dignity and privacy including checking on people’s comfort and knocking on doors before entering bedrooms and bathrooms people occupied. However, our observations showed staff did not always treat people with kindness and respect their privacy and dignity. Staff confirmed they regularly used a person’s bedroom as a hairdressing facility for other people. A staff member told us they used the room because it was close to the bathroom and another staff member told us [person] doesn’t mind. This was despite the person lacking capacity to make their own decisions.

Partner agencies feedback showed they were not always confident people were treated with dignity and respect.

We observed examples where people were not always treated with kindness and where people’s privacy and dignity was not always promoted and respected. Staff were observed using a person’s bedroom for other people without the person’s consent. We observed staff failing to respond to people’s calls for assistance when they were experiencing pain and discomfort. We did, however, observe a member of staff comforting and reassuring a person who was visibly upset and anxious.

People told us they were generally happy with the care they received and were given some choices. One person told us, “I have some choices, I like to get up early.” However, family members told us their relative had not received the right care to meet their individual needs. A family member told us their relative who was nursed in bed was experiencing a lot of discomfort because their mattress was replaced with an alternative one which was unsuitable. They told us they had raised this with managers on a number of occasions, but nothing had yet been done to ensure their relative’s needs were met in a timely way.

Staff told us they understood people’s individual needs and preferences, and they were reflected in their care plans. One member of staff shared an example of supporting a person to help alleviate their anxiety caused by their medical condition. They did this by spending time with the person and talking about things they knew would have a calming and reassuring effect on the person.

People did not always receive person centred care to meet their individual needs and preferences. People who preferred to eat in the dining area were served their meals on lap tables in the lounge because there was insufficient dining furniture. Some people were unable to view the TV as they were sat in easy chairs placed against a wall directly underneath the TV which was mounted on the wall.

It was not always evident processes worked effectively to help ensure people received individualised care and support. Guidance within care plans was not always followed to ensure people received person centred care and support to meet their individual needs. Care monitoring records were either not completed or accurately reflected the care and support people needed.

People told us they were generally happy with the care and support they received. One person told us they didn’t do much other than sit in the lounge watching television. A family member told us their relative only goes outside when they visit. Another family member told us there was no entertainment for people.

Staff told us there was just one activities co-ordinator currently in post and they were responsible for organising and facilitating one to one and group activities across the home. Staff said they did not always have time to engage people in activities because they were too busy attending to people’s personal care needs.

We observed examples when staff were rushed and did not have time to engage with people and examples where people did not receive the support, they needed to promote their independence. This included prompting and encouragement to enable people to eat and drink independently. We observed examples when staff were seated a distance away from people in the lounge area and did not actively encourage or engage people in any conversation or activities. People were not always given a choice about where they ate their meals due to insufficient dining furniture. We observed some people were served meals on side tables in the lounge when it was their preference to eat with others in the dining room. Whilst there was sufficient seating in a lounge some people who enjoyed watching the TV were unable to view it and, in another lounge, both the TV and radio were playing at the same time.

It was not always evident processes worked effectively to help ensure the care and support people received reflected their independence, choice and control. People’s care records did not always reflect their choices and level of independence or their wishes for the future including their end-of-life wishes.

Some people told us they sometimes had to wait for staff because they were busy with others. Family members provided examples of when their relative had not received the right care and support in a timely way. A family member told us they felt staff lacked understanding about certain aspects of their relative’s care needs.

Staff told us they did their best to ensure people’s needs were met in a timely way. However, they said some days it was difficult because they were so busy and on other days when there was a high use of agency staff who were unfamiliar with people’s needs.

We observed examples when people did not receive the care and support, they needed in a timely way. This included delayed responses to people’s requests for assistance and a lack of timely support for people at mealtimes.

Feedback from staff confirmed action was taken to help prevent any disparities in the experience of staff with protected equality characteristics. One member of staff told us, “Yes, I feel we are looked after here.”

There was a process in place for staff supervision and appraisal, however, supervisions and appraisal meetings between staff and managers were not always regular and frequent. This limited opportunities for staff to discuss formally and in confidence their wellbeing, work issues, development, support and performance. We were told regular staff meetings had taken place however, we were not provided with any records of the meetings to enable us to assess staff involvement or their contributions.