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.

We observed people being treated with respect by staff who knew people’s needs. Staff communicated well with people making sure information was understood. People’s privacy was upheld by staff who knocked on doors before entering and kept personal information confidential. Relatives told us staff were kind, respectful and patient and that people looked forward to staying at Bradbury House. People appeared comfortable with staff and enjoyed their company. Visiting professionals told us staff interacted well with people, with one commenting, “I observed the staff interacting with the customers in a kind and compassionate manner. Moreover, the staff were friendly towards the customers, providing care in a dignified manner and respecting their privacy. Several customers highlighted that they enjoyed their visits to Bradbury House for respite care.”

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. Relatives told us staff treated people as individuals and met their specific needs. Staff demonstrated a good knowledge of people they supported and described the individual approach they took to meeting people’s needs. Details of people’s individual needs were reflected in their support plans.

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

People were able to take part in activities to help maintain independence. This included domestic activities such as cooking and cleaning. People had an accessible kitchen they could use to cook meals and prepare their own food and drinks. Staff also planned other activities such as ball games and musical exercise. We observed people taking part and being encouraged to do what they could for themselves. Relatives told us people were supported to maintain their independence, choice and control. One commented, “They don’t force [relative] into anything. They let him live his life how he wants.”

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. Relatives told us staff responded to people’s needs and made changes to their support plans where necessary. The manager and provider regularly checked care records and completed observations to make sure support was provided in a timely way. Records demonstrated staff responded promptly to people, for example to support people during periods of anxiety which caused them distress.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. Staff told us they received the support they needed to do their job well. They said managers were open and they were able to share any concerns they had. Staff were confident managers would act on any concerns they had. The provider had an external service staff could access if needed to obtain support. The manager told us they had worked with staff unions to review staffing rotas to ensure the service was both led by the people they were supporting and accommodated staff adjustments, for example due to caring commitments or health conditions.