Blackwell Care Centre

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 were supported in a caring way by staff who knew them well. However, people’s needs were not always responded to in a timely way. People were often left unstimulated and were observed falling to sleep in an undignified manner. For example, at the dining table. Although shortfalls were identified, we saw that staff genuinely cared for people and wanted to do the best they could. However, staffing levels at the service restricted this.

This service scored 50 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Kindness, compassion and dignity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We received mixed feedback on activity provision at the service. One relative said, “It would be nice to see more activities to stimulate people”. Relatives told us their family members privacy and dignity were respected by staff. The provider had a system in place to support people to make choices. For example, there were printed photographic menus available for people with communication barriers or for people living with dementia to support them making choices of meal.

Staff told us there were minimal activities and some people may be at risk of isolation if they were cared for in bed. One staff member told us, “People do not go out, they do not have a social life. It’s like being in a prison”. Staff consistently said that activities were limited due to the staffing levels and 1 person said, “Staff do not get the time after they have done the basic stuff for people”. The registered manager told us there was not an activities schedule in place, and this was due to be implemented. We were informed of some upcoming events at the home. For example, a summer fair.

We observed that people were left without stimulation or engagement for extended periods. For example, on both our site visits, we saw people falling to sleep with their meals in front of them at the dining table. We saw people’s walking aids were accessible to them, and people were supported to mobilise independently, where able. We saw people were offered choice and this was respected. For example, where people did not want food off the daily menu, they were provided with what they had asked for. We observed visitors were welcomed into the home. People were given space to spend time with their relatives either within communal areas or within their bedrooms.

We reviewed people’s care plans which showed people’s preferences around bathing and showering. However, on review of people's personal care records, these were not always provided in line with people's care plan. Although we noted some inconsistencies in people's care records, people's care plans were informative, detailed, and designed to help ensure people received personalised care. Care plans were reviewed regularly and updated as people's needs and wishes changed.

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.