Stoneyford 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

Improvements had been made since our last inspection. People were treated with kindness, compassion and dignity. Staff promoted choice and responded to people’s immediate needs. Call bell wait times had been reduced and people told us they now felt confident staff would support them effectively and promptly in an emergency. However, people and their relatives told us that meaningful activities and day to day stimulation was lacking. We observed broken equipment such as TVs that people said affected their wellbeing.

This service scored 65 (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 they were supported with kindness, compassionate and dignity. People told us they had seen improvements in the amount of time staff could spend with them to discuss their needs and talk socially with them. One person said, “Staff are still busy, but they have time to stop for chat now which is nice, and it makes it easier to ask questions as they are about more now.” A relative said, “They look after [my family member] so well, the staff really are fantastic.”

Staff were knowledgeable about people, their likes, and dislikes as well as their social histories, and this had promoted trusting relationships to be formed. Staff said the improvements with staffing levels since our last inspection had allowed them time to have meaningful conversations with people. A staff member said, “The atmosphere in the home has changed, when I’m cleaning someone’s room it’s not frowned upon to stop and have a chat with people any longer and this makes such a difference to people and to staff.”

We observed staff spending time with people and having positive conversations. We observed staff offering and promoting choices and respecting people’s decisions. For example, we saw a staff member sat with a person completing an activity of the person’s choosing and supporting them to complete it in a way which was guided by the person with staff asking them how they could help.

We received positive feedback from professionals who worked with the service who all stated people were treated with kindness and compassion. For example, a district nurse who was on site during the assessment said “Staff are good, they take time to support people and reassure them while I’m there.”

We observed a group activity happening at the home and people were encouraged to join in. We also observed other staff members completing personalised activities with individuals such as crafting. However, for people who chose not to participate there was limited alternative activities available. We observed the TVs in communal lounges not working and there was no up to date reading material such as newspapers or magazines.

Feedback from people and their relatives was mixed, while people agreed improvements had been made, people and their relatives stated there was a long way to go regarding meaningful activities that were person-centred. One person living at the home said. “I get very bored, there isn’t a deal to do. We have 2 TVs but neither work.” Another person said, “I would like to go for a walk around the building every day, but it doesn’t always happen.” A relative commented, “Recently there have been some great experiences like the Mother’s Day lunch, staff were fantastic. Its more about day-to-day stimulation, it can be very lacking.”

People’s individual needs and preferences were reflected within their care plans. We saw evidence of meaningful conversations with people at the care planning stage which included their social histories. The provider and management team had an ongoing action plan to ensure personalised care was delivered which maximised people’s experience and outcomes but more time was needed to embed this throughout the service.

The new manager described challenges with recruitment and retention of an activities co-ordinator but confirmed this role had now been recruited to and the staff member was in the process of getting to know people. The new manager said, “We don’t want to just put any activities on for the sake of it so we need to understand what residents want and we can do that now and have started. However, we also need to ensure people have one to one time with staff if they prefer.” We spoke with the activities co-ordinator who discussed forging links with the local community going forward to support people to access additional activities outside the home.

Staff told us they had completed training in Dignity and Respect. Staff told us how they had applied this training to improve people’s experiences. One staff member said, “I’m always conscious of my surroundings and make sure I speak to people in private to keep their dignity.”

People and their relatives told us they were supported with their independence and had choice and control over their care. People told us they were invited to residents’ meetings where they could raise feedback and discuss ideas. One person said, “The new manager is really trying, we have residents’ meetings every 3 weeks.” Another person said, "Yes staff offer me choice, it’s never assumed.”

We observed staff having meaningful conversations with people and offering choice. Where people lacked capacity, we saw staff encouraging people to make decisions and choices. For example, we observed staff showing people different meal options to help them make informed choices.

Improvements had been made following our last inspection. People now had access to equipment which promoted their health, wellbeing and independence such as slide sheets and hoists. People were supported to maintain family links and social contacts that were important to them. Family and friends were encouraged to visit the home without limitations and engage with people and group activities. Where needed, people were supported to contact relatives and friends with the use of technology such as computers and tablets.

People told us staff now responded to their needs promptly and this had been a large area of improvement since our last inspection. One person said, “When I press the call bell, staff now come and fairly quickly.” Another person said, “Before I could wait over an hour, that has changed and I feel safer.” Everyone we spoke with was confident staff could support them in an emergency.

Staff told us they felt able to respond to people’s needs effectively due to changes and consistency in staffing since our last inspection. A staff member said, “We have more staff and training has improved so we can respond when people need us.” Another staff member said, “We work as a team now and we know what our responsibilities are.” The new manager said, “We have developed staff which has increased their confidence. This means people are receiving care quicker but also consistently. We try to pre-empt needs rather than responding to emergencies.”

During the assessment the home environment appeared calm and relaxed. We observed staff responding to call bells in a timely and effective manner. We observed management actively monitoring response times during the day and addressing or supporting staff where needed. We observed staff responding to people’s care needs appropriately and without delay. For example, one person in a communal lounge requested support with toileting and staff responded immediately.

Staff told us there had been improvements in workforce wellbeing and enablement but felt further changes were still required. One staff member said. “It’s been hard, but staff morale has improved, and people work together more now. We get feedback and support which helps in feeling valued.” Another staff member said, “The new manager is very supportive, and we feel more like a team now, I just hope it continues as it hasn’t done before.” The new manager described challenges they had faced in building an open and transparent culture in the home. “Staff previously felt let down and unheard and we are changing this. Leading by example and being true to our word has seen in a shift in the culture already.”

Improvements had been made since our last inspection. Staffing levels were consistent and safe. The management team used a staff dependency tool which now accurately reflected people’s needs and the level of support they needed from staff. We saw evidence of regular team meetings and supervisions where staff were able to give and receive feedback. The management team acknowledged that workforce wellbeing and enablement was an ongoing developmental area and had an action plan to ensure the culture of the home developed effectively, positively and was driven by feedback from people and staff, however further time was needed to ensure this could be embedded effectively and sustained in the service and through increasing admissions to the home.