Blackburn (Florence House)

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 service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. For this key question we assessed the quality statements relating to; independence, choice and control and responding to people’s immediate needs. People were treated with kindness and most people were happy with their care. Staff promoted independence and knew how to provide care for people and meet their needs. Staff had access to electronic care records with information about people’s needs, likes and choices. Activities were ongoing in the service and in the community.

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.

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.

There was mixed feedback about the activities provided. People told us, “[Person who used the service] used to be bubbly, and go out, recently this has gone, and doesn't go out to places they used to go”, “They are certainly giving [person] the opportunity to do the things [they] like” and, “I like drawing pictures, watching films and going to buy colouring books with staff, but don't go out much.” People told us they were treated with kindness and received good care in line with their support and individual needs. Most relatives were happy with the care and the involvement and choices their family member was supported with.

Staff understood how to support independence, choice, control and help people maintain relationships with those who were important to them. They told us the electronic care records detailed all of the necessary information to help them provide care and support. Staff told us, “Relatives do visit. We used to do face time during COVID-19, we have not done this recently”, “We make sure people are supported to do things themselves and we support people to be healthy” and, “It is a good home [service] people are treated with respect and dignity.” The registered manager and the staff team told us a range of activities were undertaken. They said, “People do get out, recently we have been to sea life, and a recent pantomime, activities are also on a one to one basis. They also go to the shops or cinema”, “There are external activities swimming, cinema, fair, shopping. Internally people can do colouring and Lego” and, “Recently we went to the seaside, people have been swimming this morning. People do arts and crafts in the service, they recently had people in and they did a pantomime.”

Kind and caring interactions were seen between people and staff. People were offered choices and staff ensured people were happy with the care provided. People were asked during the meal time experience where they would like to sit and what they would like to eat. Where people required more support during periods of anxiety or concern, these were managed effectively, with patience and empathy. We saw evidence of activities taking place both in the service and in the community. Some basic activities were undertaken during our visit to the service. There had been a recent BBQ for people. Evidence of communal activities were noted, including events and entertainers visiting. Not all people’s rooms supported and protected their dignity. The registered manager took action to ensure appropriate privacy screening was in place on windows following day one of our site visit. Other bedrooms were nicely decorated and personalised to people’s liking.

People were supported to be independent. People were supported with communication and alternative ways of communicating was noted in documentation, these included pictorial information. Care plans contained information about communicating and reviews had taken place. Care plans detailed people’s likes and choices and what was important to them. Policies and guidance was available to support independence and choice. Equipment was available for people to use where this was required. The registered manager told us they were in the process of updating the communal bathrooms to support increased accessible facilities. An up to date visitors policy and guidance supported visitors to the service. A visitors book detailed people visiting the service. The registered manager told us they had introduced a new book to capture times of entry and exit to support safe evacuation in the event of an emergency.

Most people were happy with the care they received. They said, “The staff treat me well here and I get on with everybody” and, “I am happy with the care.” Relatives feedback was mixed. A relative raised concerns about the changes they had noted in their family member. They said, “[Person] used to be bubbly, and go out, recently this has gone.” The registered manager agreed to consider feedback from people and relatives to ensure any concerns were acted upon. During our observations two people made us aware of a physical concern. The registered manager was able to demonstrate an understanding of the concerns and spoke about the actions taken in relation to these. However, they failed to engage and reassure the people at the time.

One concern was raised in relation to supporting a person’s care and the use of mobile phones amongst staff. We suggested to the registered manager that more information was made available to people, family and visitors, to explain that care plans and documentation was held and updated on hand held devices. Staff told us how they would ensure they responded to people’s immediate needs. They said “I understand people’s needs we can try to indicate through body language need. I read the care plans to help communication” and, “I would be happy for my family member to live here. It is really well organised everyone pulls their weight and we work together. The staff know people well, it is a good team.” The management team demonstrated a good understanding of people’s needs and how to provide their support. They told us information was stored securely on electronic hand held devices, and daily handovers were completed with the staff team which were recorded daily. Staff were allocated to support care was provided to people for their shift. When people required one to one support, this was provided.

Staff were visible in the communal areas and available to offer support to people as they needed. However, we noted staff were not always engaging in meaningful conversations with people. We suggested that the management undertakes observations in the service to ensure meaningful engagement was provided to people. Where one to one support was required for people this was in place. The registered manager gave assurance that they would ensure all staff understood the times people required the one to one support according to their needs.

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.