Bilton 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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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.

People were involved in their care planning. One person told us, “I do know of my care plan, and it is revisited with my input.”

Care records were person-centred. They included people’s individual needs, preferences and routines, and were accessible to staff. Records included an ‘About Me’ section intended to provide staff with a detailed understanding of each person. However, this section had not been completed in some files.

People were encouraged to take part in things they cared about. One person told us they write articles for the home newsletter, and others explained how they were able to read, use the internet, or help out with activities.

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.

Staff worked well with external healthcare professionals to support with meeting people’s healthcare needs. One health professional told us, “I feel they are a good team, and work well to support the needs of [the residents]. They raise appropriate concerns with me and my team as required and are able to provide updates as requested by our team too.”

People were looked after by a generally consistent staff team and staff knew people well. One person told us, “I have known the staff for a very long time, I have absolute trust in them,” A relative shared, “Some [staff] have been there a long time and know [name] well." However, one person thought there were a lot of agency staff used.

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

The registered manager checked people’s communication needs during assessment to determine if they needed hearing or visual aids. After an incident when a person had struggled to communicate with paramedics, the registered manager found an app that supported communication with text to speak and vice versa.

Staff supported people to communicate effectively and tailored their approach to individual needs. For example, we observed a staff member clearly talking through the menu options with a person who was finding it difficult to read the printed menu.

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.

Some people told us they were not always given opportunities to share their views. One person said, ‘They never ask me my opinion.” Relatives did not feel involved in decisions about their loved ones’ care. One relative told us, "I have not been involved in any care planning or any reviews.” And other said, "We're not really kept involved when there are changes made."

People knew who to contact if they needed to make a complaint. One person told us, “If I have any concerns which is rare, I contact senior staff.” Relatives told us they would speak to the registered manager.

Residents were invited to attend 4 meetings a year with the activity’s coordinator. One person told us, “I attend residents’ meetings, I mentioned doors open and playing loud tv, radio, nothing else to complain about.”

The registered manager gave an example of when residents shared their concerns about visitors arriving during mealtimes. Because of this feedback, management implemented ‘protected mealtimes’ to allow residents to enjoy their meals with minimal disruption.

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

People were supported to attend medical appointments. One person told us, “They arrange my appointments and transport to the hospital for me.” Staff were also flexible where needed. We observed staff organising last minute alternative arrangements for somebody when their taxi failed to arrive to take them to an appointment.

The registered manager understood how to access specialist support should people need it and had developed links with other healthcare professionals. They told us, “We do have good relationships with other professionals.” This was confirmed with feedback from healthcare professionals.

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.

People told us they were happy living at Bilton House. Comments included, “I do like it here the environment feels alright,” and “I would encourage others to live in this home.”

People’s needs were assessed prior to admission, and any protected characteristics were recorded.

Staff had received equality and diversity training and were observed promoting people’s rights and choices during interactions.

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.

At the time of our inspection, no one was receiving end of life care. However, people were asked about their end of life wishes during the assessment process to ensure their care was planned respectfully and delivered in line with what mattered most to them should their health decline. The registered manager told us, “People don’t always want to talk about it, but I explain it's a lot easier to discuss it now before it's needed. If they still don't want to discuss it, we will document that.”

People were supported to complete a Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) plan, if they chose. ReSPECT plans are used to document a person’s wishes for their clinical care in emergency situations, where the person would not be able to make decisions or express their wishes.