Marina View 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 were treated with kindness, dignity and compassion. Staff treated people as individuals and promoted people's choice and control. Permanent staff could respond to people's needs. The service had policies to support the wellbeing of staff.

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.

People and relatives were positive about their experiences on the whole. A person said, "I feel that we are all treated with dignity and respect by the staff. They have a good rapport with my family and me." A relative said, "Generally speaking, my [relative] is treated with dignity and respect. The regular carers are a lovely bunch here." However, a relative spoke of their loved one not being supported properly during mealtimes, and felt this was not dignified for their relative.

Staff explained how they supported people with kindness and compassion, ensuring their privacy and dignity was respected. A staff member told us, “I will pull curtains closed during personal care, will wait outside the bathroom [to provide privacy] if appropriate to do so, and will talk to people whilst delivering care.” Staff confirmed they had enough time to sit and talk with people and made an effort to speak to people to help understand their preferences, wishes and personal backgrounds.

Partners told us that a privacy screen was not used on occasion. This had been addressed.

We observed positive interactions between staff and people, for example during lunch time. Staff spoke in a pleasant and friendly manner and treated people with dignity whilst supporting them to eat and drink.

People told us they thought most staff knew them well and could support them when requested. A person said that staff tried to accommodate their needs, but that it was difficult due to staff numbers. Relatives said that some staff, especially agency staff had little knowledge about people's likes and dislikes

Staff told us they tried to take account of people's personal preferences, and supported them with their interests and hobbies. However, they acknowledged at times this was difficult due to staffing levels.

We saw people had personal items in their bedrooms such as knick-knacks and photographs, and staff treated people as individuals. Staff engaged people positively when supporting with personal care, eating and drinking, or moving around the home. Staff were observed to be patient when supporting people with communication needs, ensuring people could engage with their care and make their own choices.

The provider had policies to support dignity, choice and control.

A person told us, "I think that all the staff are nice and allow me as much choice and control in how I am to be supported by them. They listen to my preferences and act upon them." Relatives said things are getting better and there is now an activities co-ordinator.

Staff confirmed that people were supported to have choice and control over their day-to-day care. A staff member said, “I will ask people what they want and respect their choice. I would give them options with clothing or what they would like to eat. For those with limited capacity, I might offer 2 different choices.” People were supported to maintain relationships important to them. Visitors were welcome at the home and staff told us they would help facilitate phone calls or video calls with friends and family. Staff explained how a new activities co-ordinator had helped improve people’s access to activities which had improved people’s wellbeing. A staff member said, “The activities co-ordinator is good, and we are noticing a difference. People’s signs of distress of anxiety have dropped because they are more engaged.”

We observed that people were given choices about their meals and drinks, and what activities they would like to participate in. People could personalise their rooms according to their taste.

There were policies to support privacy and dignity, and choice and control.

Relatives felt that at times they had to push for things to be followed up or dealt with. Some people and relatives felt that staff had not been trained to deal with some specific or complex needs.

Some staff said they spent time communicating with people moving into the home, to better understand them. However, others reported they did not have access to people’s care plans and risk assessments straight away. As such, we could not be fully assured staff would be able to quickly anticipate people’s needs, wishes or comfort.

Whilst we saw some positive interactions from staff, they did not always have the time to observe or respond to people’s immediate needs. We observed a person raising concerns about missing lunch, due to staff forgetting to return to their bedroom. Another person was asked to wait for staff to be made available when they requested help to move elsewhere in the home. When we tested a call-bell, a member of staff from the opposite unit had to respond as staff on the unit were involved in 1-1 or 2-1 care.

Staff told us that morale had been low for some time with previous management arrangements, however they felt that improvements were now being made and they felt more comfortable. Staff told us the new manager was approachable and supportive. Managers said they were taking a firm but fair approach to help them deal with challenges and gaps in quality of care.

We saw policies that supported staff health and wellbeing.