Trafalgar 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. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant people were not always treated as individuals, and staff did not always feels supported with their wellbeing.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to providing person centred care.

This service scored 55 (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 told us, “I get on great with the staff” and, “Staff are really nice, one staff in particular even when she is working downstairs just comes up to check I’m alright.” Relatives said, “[loved one] gets on well with all the staff, they are kind and respectful”, “Staff are kind, they often sit with [loved one] to calm them and offer reassurance” and, “Staff ensure [loved one’s] dignity is protected, like has knees covered when they are being hoisted. They are very, very kind and understand that this is their home.” A healthcare professional said, “Staff are kind, and I believe they care.”

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics. The registered manager told us people’s needs, likes, dislikes, cultural and unique backgrounds were discussed during initial assessments prior to the person moving into the home. However, there was no evidence to demonstrate how this translated into everyday life. For example, there was a lack of options for people to be involved in daily activities. Staff told us, “The residents have little stimulation. Activity staff do not work past 12pm and there are no activity staff at the weekends or during school term time.” Relatives told us, “I’ve never seen activities in the afternoon. [Loved one] is interested in sport but this is never shown on the TV. They do not get supported to use the garden which is a shame as it is a nice garden” and, “The biggest thing I’d like to see improved is the activities, the TV is always on and it’s always the same. I’ve not seen any staff ask residents what they want to watch, it would be nice for [loved one] to watch the things they like.”

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. People did not always have access to activities and the local community to promote and support their independence, health and wellbeing. We received feedback from staff, relatives and healthcare professionals that people were not afforded the opportunity to take trips outside of the home. The registered manager could not give us any recent examples of accessing the community however told us, “As part of the care planning process we ask residents what their interests are, if there are any services they want to access and ask if they want to go out to have fish and chips at the beach.” Relatives told us, “The residents do not get enough fresh air, unless they have a visitor to take them out, they generally don’t go out” and, “residents can’t go outside as there’s never enough staff. I feel that unless I take [loved one] outside, it would not happen.” One staff said, “I always involve the person in decisions about their care, no matter how small. This shows that their voice matters, and I’m not just doing things for them but with them. [Resident] preferred to have their breakfast later because they liked to sleep in. I adjusted their routine to suit this preference. I also ask them what they want for breakfast, rather than assuming they wanted what was on the menu.”

Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. We observed staff providing reassurance to people on the day of our inspection. One staff member told us, “If a resident is agitated, I will make them calm by talking about their favourite things. For example, if (person) is agitated I know they like colouring books.” Relatives told us, “[Loved one] gets upset sometimes and confused as to when I’m due to visit. Staff will reassure them; this is exactly what [loved one] needs.” And, “I’ve seen staff dealing with residents having disputes, splitting them up and removing them from the situation, giving them reassurance. They understand their clientele.” A healthcare professional said, “I feel the staff have the wellbeing of their residents at the centre of what they do.”

Staff did not always feel the provider cared about and promoted their wellbeing. Feedback from staff included, “Agincare support staff well-being and help staff perform their roles effectively by offering training” and, “Unfortunately, there is very little support for staff well-being. The work environment can be stressful, and management does not always address concerns effectively.” The registered manager showed us literature that had been shared with staff to promote their wellbeing and told us, “We have an open-door policy and protected time so staff know they can come to us anytime but in case they don’t want to disturb us they have a protected time they can come and speak to us if they want to.”