Blackheath Brain Injury Rehabilitation Centre

This means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs.

At our last inspection, we rated this key question good. At this inspection, the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

At our previous inspection, we found the provider had breached Regulation 17 due to the absence of a formal process for collecting feedback from patients, families, and carers about the quality and safety of the service. At this inspection, we found the provider had addressed this. The service had implemented structured systems to gather feedback, and patients and family members confirmed they knew how to provide it. Feedback was collected through questionnaires, forums, and surveys, with actions coordinated by a senior staff member. Patients were also able to give feedback during community meetings. Contact details for the advocate were displayed throughout the service.

The provider had established processes to support carer involvement, including bi-monthly carers’ forums and family meetings every 6 to 8 weeks. A senior staff member managed concerns and escalated issues when required. Monthly walkarounds were conducted to identify and respond to patient feedback. Meeting minutes were shared on the same day. A post-discharge patient survey was in development at the time of the inspection.

Monthly patient meetings took place, although staff reported inconsistent attendance. There was evidence of action taken in response to some areas of feedback, such as food quality and therapy provision.

The provider had suitable policies in place to meet legal requirements around equality and human rights. Staff understood the importance of avoiding discrimination, considering the needs of people with protected characteristics, and making reasonable adjustments to support fair outcomes.