Bayith Rest Home

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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Despite information in care plans not always containing detailed information, we found staff knew people very well. They were able to describe what worked well for people to meet their care needs in a way that suited them. People and relatives confirmed this. For example, 1 person said, “I’m very happy with the way I’m looked after.” A relative said, “They [staff] know what he [Person] likes and have got to know his ways.”There was a consistent core staff team, which meant staff had got to know people's needs and preferences well. They shared this information with new and temporary staff at handover. We observed people expressing their individual needs and wishes which was respected by staff. A health professional told us how well staff knew people and how this meant people’s changing needs were quickly responded to.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People received good continuity of care because staff worked well with health and social care partners. Partners were positive about the way the service worked with them and about the support they provided to people.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats tailored to individual needs.

Staff understood people's communication needs and tailored communication methods to each individual. This helped people make decisions in their day-to-day life. Signs were displayed throughout the home and people’s doors were different colours to help orientation.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

People said they could speak to any of the staff should they need to and were confident the manager would address issues raised.People and relatives' views were sought. The provider had completed surveys and responded to feedback. Some relatives said they would benefit from knowing the results and be more informed about what changes had been made. Meetings were also held and the minutes showed how people were listened to, and action taken when suggestions were made.No one had any complaints, but they told us they would feel comfortable to raise a complaint if required.

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The provider had arranged for some services to come into the home for people’s ease. This included a weekly ward round from a GP and a chiropodist. If people needed to access care out of the home, staff or relatives supported them to do this. People could call for help from staff using call bells which were answered promptly. Staff knew 1 person was unable to use a call bell, and we observed staff frequently checking on them.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

The service advocated for people to receive the care and treatment they needed. The manager described a situation where they “had to fight” for a person to receive a treatment for their health, rather than be declined due to their age and diagnosis. Relatives shared examples where staff had responded to concerns and sought medical attention when required. Training records showed staff completed equality and diversity training.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

The service supported people with end of life care, although no one was receiving end of life care at the time of our inspection. Where people had wanted to discuss their end of life care, care plans detailed people's wishes regarding this. Staff told us they received training and felt competent and confident in supporting people at the end of their lives.The manager told us they liked to remember people who had passed away and made special teddies to remember them. We saw these were displayed.