White Hart 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. This is the first inspection for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

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.

When staff interacted with people they were treated with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. We were not made aware of any occasions where staff had not treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect. A relative told us, “I can tell my relative is happy living there. They do understand their communication needs and they look after their dignity, they are very conscious of it.”

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics. The manager told us, “Our biggest success story is most of the people had come from the home setting, so supporting them to move from home and making it a positive change for them has been a great achievement. We see the people developing into young adults. We are enjoying supporting them to try new things and develop new skills.”

The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment, and wellbeing. Staff were positive in empowering people to be as independent as possible and celebrated this. We observed the mealtime experience for people. People were given a choice of food and drink and were supported to maintain their independence. We observed they were supported at a pace which suited them, and staff were communicating with people in the way they preferred and were kind and compassionate.

The service did not always promptly listen to and understand people’s needs, views, and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern, or distress without delay. We observed a person requesting support multiple times. On two occasions the person waited 5 minutes, then 16 minutes for a staff member to support them. Staff who knew the person understood what they were trying to communicate and were able to respond accordingly, whilst other staff did not know which meant the person became increasingly frustrated. This meant some staff had to rely on other staff to tell them. We spoke to the manager about this who told us, they would add an additional easy read communication guide for staff to follow.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled them to always deliver person-centred care. Staff members we spoke with told us they felt valued, respected, and supported within their roles. A staff member said, “It is a good place to work. I have come into this new to the role. I have had the support from the managers, and I don’t feel bad for asking questions as they don’t mind and will always help me.” Team meetings were held to discuss issues relevant to the service or staff experience. A staff survey had also just been issued at the time of assessment, to encourage feedback.