Bradbury House

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (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.

Relatives told us they were happy with the service they received, which met people’s specific needs. People and their relatives had been involved in planning the support they needed. Staff said the service was focused on meeting people’s specific needs, to help them develop skills and independence. This approach was reflected in the records of support provided.

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.

The provider worked in partnership with other agencies, to ensure people received continuity of care. Professionals told us staff discussed any concerns with them to resolve issues. Professionals said staff took a person-centred approach, to support people to make their own decisions. Details of this support was recorded in people’s care records.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People and relatives told us they received all the information they needed from the provider. People’s communication needs had been assessed, and a communication support plan had been developed. Documents had been provided in more accessible formats for people, including the use of symbols and pictures. This included information on how to make a complaint, contact details for anyone who doesn’t feel safe and support plans. The manager had recently obtained access to software applications that enabled documents to be quickly translated into an easier to read format, which they were testing out.

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. The manager tracked all concerns and complaints that had been raised to ensure they had been followed up and action taken. Records demonstrated all concerns had been investigated and actions taken to resolve issues. People had been given feedback about the concerns they had raised. Relatives told us staff listened to them and took action to resolve any issues.

The provider did not always make sure that people could access all areas of the service equally. Most areas of the service were accessible for everyone that stayed at Bradbury House. For example, some rooms had accessible bathrooms and overhead hoists, there was step free access throughout the building and there was an accessible kitchen, with adjustable worktops and hob to make it easier for people using a wheelchair to access. The garden had a swing, which was able to safely accommodate a person using a wheelchair. However, access to the swing was up a steep grass bank. The manager confirmed this was very difficult to support people to access in a wheelchair, especially following periods of wet weather. The manager had identified the problem with the provider’s property maintenance team and was waiting to find out whether they had secured funding to make the swing accessible.

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 manager was aware of the barriers people with disabilities may face and worked with a range of agencies to support people to overcome these, including supporting people and their relatives to ensure they were being supported in the least restrictive way possible which still met their needs. People were supported to access local community services and healthcare by staff when needed. Staff had 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 was not providing any end-of-life care. Staff were aware of people’s wishes for the future, for example whether people wanted to go to hospital for further treatment or whether they had a do not attempt resuscitation plan in place. This information was recorded in people’s care plans.