Brambling Lodge

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

The key question of responsive continues to be rated good. The quality statement ‘Equity in experiences and outcomes’ has been assessed as good. People were supported to access activities, healthcare and support when their needs changed.

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 Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

People were treated as individuals and received their care and support in the way they wanted. A relative told us staff knew their loved one well and provided care which was personal to them. Another relative told us their loved one was never forgotten and received all the support they needed. A person told us, “I see people all of the time. I never feel alone”. All the people we spoke with told us people received their care and support in private. Relatives told us staff maintained people’s dignity.

The provider completed regular audits to monitor the quality of the service. During these audits they spoke with people, relatives and staff to monitor their opinions of the service. Action plans were put in place when shortfalls were identified and these were signed off when completed. People, staff and relatives had been asked their opinions on the service and any suggestions in quality assurance surveys. The responses had been overwhelmingly positive. The registered manager had completed a 'You said/We did' for each survey to continue to improve the service and incorporate suggestions made.

Staff applied the ‘mum’s test’ which is when staff think about how they would want their mum to be supported when providing care. Staff understood people’s routines. For example, a staff member told us they were greeted on their arrival each day by a person. They knew the person wanted a coffee when they greeted them and made it for them. Some people wanted to support staff to complete tasks. One person liked to dust with the housekeeper, while other people liked to fold laundry. There was a housekeeping trolley for people to use if they wanted to be involved in household chores. Staff told us people enjoyed a variety of pastimes and were supported to take part in the things they enjoyed. For example, one person liked to sing along to their favourite songs and staff did this with them. Other people preferred to watch the television in the quiet lounge in the morning and join other people in the main lounge in the afternoon. We observed people being supported to do these things during the inspection. The district nurse confirmed staff contacted them when people were nearing the end of their life to make sure people and their relatives were involved in planning their care.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.