Camelot Care Homes Ltd

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

We reviewed 2 quality statements for this key question. People were complimentary about the staff. However, some interactions were limited, and some support was task orientated. Staff enjoyed their role and there were a range of systems to ensure their wellbeing.

This service scored 75 (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.

People and their relatives told us preferences were respected. This included what time to get up and go to bed, what to eat and how to spend the day. However, one person told us their independence was being restricted due to problems with their en-suite. Leaders told us they were aware of this and had arranged for the work to be carried out as soon as possible.

Staff told us they tried to enable people to do as much for themselves as they could and make choices about their daily activities. This included choosing what time to get up, what to wear and what activities to participate in. Staff told us people chose where they wanted to spend their day, with some people staying in their room at all times. Leaders said they always told staff, “I’m not the boss, the people who live here are.” This meant people should direct and be in control of their own care, with staff supporting wherever needed.

We observed people’s rights to independence and choice were not always promoted. For example, staff did not always place the person’s meal right in front of them and plate guards were fitted incorrectly, and not used consistently. This did not help promote independence or the person’s dignity. Another person took their clothes protector off, and without asking, a staff member put it back on. They did not respect the person’s choice of not wearing it. There was limited communication with people during these interventions or when staff were overseeing the lounge. This did not ensure people’s involvement or promote their rights.

Records showed people and their relatives were involved in care planning and its review. This enabled people’s wishes to be revisited and implemented as required.

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

Staff felt supported in their role. They said they had support from each other and leaders and were able to take regular breaks. Staff told us they were asked if they wanted to do additional shifts to cover staff sickness and annual leave, but there was no pressure to do so. Leaders told us they had a good team who cared about people and each other. They said they completed all formal one to one meetings with staff. This was to ensure consistency, but also to be aware of each staff member’s wellbeing and any concerns they might have.

Systems to ensure workforce wellbeing and enablement were working well. There was a structured staff supervision and appraisal programme, which leaders facilitated. Staff training and progression were given priority and there were regular staff meetings. Staff were able to take their breaks in a specific staff room. Leaders adjusted their working day to ensure they met with night staff. This ensured inclusion and the wellbeing of all staff members.