You are here

Bramley House Residential Home Good

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 5 March 2013
Date of Publication: 16 April 2013
Inspection Report published 16 April 2013 PDF

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 5 March 2013, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We sent a questionnaire to people who use the service, talked with people who use the service and talked with staff.

Our judgement

People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected. People’s views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care.

Reasons for our judgement

People who use the service understood the care and treatment choices available to them. We saw information which confirmed that people were consulted about their care and treatment. Care plans were developed to meet their needs. We saw that care plans had been signed by people or their representative.

We found that Information had been gathered about people’s hobbies and interests, their likes and dislikes and their preferred routines. A person we spoke with said they were able to get up in the morning when they liked. Another person said that staff supported them with their personal care and supported them to be as independent as possible.

The manager told us that before a person moved in to the home an assessment of their needs was completed that people or their representative were involved in. We saw some assessments which confirmed this. People we spoke with said that they or their representative had visited the service before they had moved in to help them decide if this was the right home for them. A person who used the service said they had stayed at the home for a trial visit for two weeks.

People’s diversity, values and human rights were respected. The home provided a relaxed and unrushed atmosphere. We observed people’s bedroom doors were shut when staff supported them with their personal care. We saw staff knocking on people’s bedroom doors before entering. We saw staff providing sensitive and dignified support to people who needed it. People we spoke with said that the staff were polite and respected their right to privacy. Comments included, “The staff are very caring”, "they are always cheerful”, “the staff are always ready to help” and “I made the right decision choosing this home”.

Home meetings took place in consultation with people who used the service and feedback surveys had been distributed to gain people's views about the care provided, although these had not been recently updated.

Some people said if they didn’t like their meal they could request an alternative. Our observations confirmed this. Two people told us that they were asked about their food preferences and they were told about the meals available each day. However one person said that they did not like fish but they were provided with this meal. The provider may find it useful to note that there was no written menu on display to assist people in reminding them what was for lunch and that they could request an alternative.

The service provided therapeutic and social activities. At the time of this inspection a group of people were participating in an exercise class. Other activities included arts and crafts, music and visiting entertainers. Links were maintained with the local community and Holy Communion was provided. People we spoke with said that they enjoyed the activities which they could choose to participate in or not.