Bradbury 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 provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

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

This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.
 

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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Interactions were kind, attentive and encouraging, with friendly good-natured communication observed contributing to a relaxed and positive atmosphere. Staff demonstrated they knew people well, understood their needs and actively promoted people’s privacy and dignity. There was a clearly established culture of staff knocking on people’s doors, whether open on not, before entering people’s rooms.

We observed staff taking time to provide further support for people if they required this, based on their preferences. When a person was not engaging well with staff, other staff who knew them well stepped in to provide reassurance and supported them to accept the care they needed. This demonstrated staffs’ ability to recognise distress as well as their ability to respond with kindness and compassion to ensure a positive outcome and experience for people.

Feedback from professionals spoke highly of the staff culture around dignity and respect. A health care professional told us “Staff are proactive. Even the maintenance team have stepped in to help support [some people] to health appointments when [people] have asked them to go with them”. Another professional told us “Staff are keen…they want to get the care they provide right, and many staff have been there a long while. For me, it passes the “mum test”.

People told us, “This place is excellent at all points, they are always searching for excellence too, it is the consistency you find here, the consistency of the care in looking after people, the range of preventing loneliness and doing the grotty side of caring, of cleaning people and changing their clothes. Best of all though is that the people go at it with joy and keenness, they never have a bad day either”.

The provider 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.

Staff consistently treated people as individuals and were able to tell us about people’s lives from before they moved into the service, as well as their preferences and interests. Staff demonstrated a strong understanding of people as individuals and used this knowledge to tailor care and support, taking full account of people’s protected equality characteristics.

Care plans also provided personalised information about people, although some of this information could be improved and used to improve personalised activities for people. The provider was reviewing care plans as part of their internal improvement plan that was put in place after an internal mock inspection which had recently taken place.

One relative told us, “The staff do a very good job of treating people as individuals, respecting their needs and wishes”.
 

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People and their representatives told us they were supported to maintain their independence, had their choices respected and felt they still had control over their lives. For example, people could choose how to have their bedrooms furnished and were provided opportunities to engage in decisions regarding the service; from decoration, how the garden was maintained, to what food and meals they wanted on the menus. People told us, “The process is there to ensure there is always feedback and you are encouraged to give feedback too and any matter they always try to nail on the head”.

During the assessment, we observed a variety of activities which were set out in structured programmes for people who attended the activity centre. These ran from Monday to Saturday with a more informal approach to Sundays with a church service, Sunday lunch and the option of a film in the afternoon. There was also an upcoming outing planned for a “Mystery Tour” in the minibus to admire bluebells at a local woodland. We observed activity staff interacting with people, supporting them to take part and enjoy the activities provided. People were engaged, had positive and supportive interaction from staff.

There was little evidence of structured or planned opportunities for people to take part in meaningful individualised activities. Although the service had a lively activity centre, where people chose not to or were unable to attend group activities, it was unclear as to how the service supported them to engage in other activities outside of this provision. This was discussed with the service, and the registered manager provided an action plan to demonstrate how they were going to address this shortfall within the service.

People were supported to have control over their day-to-day choices and routines. Visiting arrangements were open and unrestricted, and family members and friends were welcomed, supporting people to maintain important relationships. Staff had developed positive, respectful relationships with people using the service, enabling them to understand individual preferences and support needs. Staff had also developed positive relationships with people’s relatives, which helped them understand people’s preferences, including where people were unable to express these themselves.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

The provider was active in seeking feedback and acting on complaints. People told us, “You are encouraged to file formal complaints if you ever have an issue, there is a definite and clear process too”.

We observed there was a theme around complaints over the meals provided. The management team had acted on this by providing people with regular food forum meetings; these were well attended and had resulted in improvements around portion sizes, offering greater flexibility and choice at mealtimes, changing menus, supplying individually requested food items and working more closely with people to ensure their preferences was reflected in the menu. Alongside this, we observed staff asking people for feedback on their dining experience during the visit and there was also a comments book available for feedback from people, staff and visitors. This was monitored by management and trustees for the provider. The registered manager advised there is a large focus on the food within the service, and they are working on making bigger improvements.
 

The provider always cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and was good at supporting and enabling staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Systems were in place to support staff which enabled to carry out their roles effectively. Staff had access to regular one to one meetings with staff and a record of these were maintained. Staff told us they felt well supported and could approach any member of the management team for support at any time with the provider having an open-door policy which promoted an open, supportive culture.

The provider used a digital workforce management system for rota management. The provider told us the rotas were usually published 4–6 weeks in advance and are shared with staff ensuring accessibility and transparency. This advance notice allowed staff to plan their personal commitments and provided sufficient time to raise any queries, request adjustments and ensure all shifts are covered. Staff worked early and late shifts as opposed to long days. This supported staff wellbeing and helped maintain consistent staffing levels.

The provider fostered a supportive culture for staff wellbeing. Most of the staff team were long standing and the provider had ensured staff were recognised and celebrated by providing long service awards for staff. The service also provided meals for staff while they were working.

Staff had access to the visiting physiotherapist should they need this. The registered manager advised this had benefited both staff and the service in reducing staff absence. The provider also offered counselling services to staff who may benefit from this. Both of these services were available to staff both within and outside of their working hours. The registered manager advised this had benefited both staff and the service in reducing staff absence. Staff had access to mental health awareness training, and senior members of the team were trained Mental Health First Aiders (MHFA), providing additional support and guidance to colleagues when required.

Staff told us, “It’s a very good place to work”, “I’m proud to be part of the team…the management team provides good support to staff” and “I enjoy the job as it’s rewarding and gives me a chance to make a difference. It’s an emotional fulfilment”.

The service was active in nurturing the wellbeing of staff, the retention of staff and recognition of staff which was essential in building a strong, reliable and compassionate staff culture. This meant people received continuity of care helping staff understand people well.