Bradbury House - Care Home with Nursing Physical Disabilities

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 service met people’s needs. At the last inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 79 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People experienced care which reflected who they were, what mattered to them, and how they wished to be supported. Staff demonstrated a strong ethos of dignity, empathy and individualised care, and people’s daily routines and preferences meaningfully shaped how support was delivered. People and their relatives told us that staff really knew people. Staff adapted their practices to meet each person’s needs. For example, some people who had moved had very complex physical health care needs including support with nutrition via PEG feeding and breathing via tracheostomies. Staff had closely worked with the various clinical teams and people had been enabled to be able to eat and breathe without this equipment. Care records reflected people’s assessed needs and included information about what was important to them. A staff member said, “People are involved in discussions regarding their care plans and risk management strategies. They can answer questions in a way that best suits them such as verbal, non-verbal or using a communication aid. People can invite family or friends to be involved in the development of these plans.”

Staff understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. People experienced coordinated care, and staff worked well with external professionals to ensure care remained responsive to people’s changing needs. Staff were proactive when people’s health changed, making timely referrals and ensuring professionals had accurate information. External partners, including GPs, therapists and dietitians, consistently told us the team worked collaboratively, communicated well and followed professional advice to maintain continuity. Relatives told us they were kept informed about changes in people’s health and care, and that staff responded quickly when concerns were raised. Staff described effective teamwork and said they felt equipped to provide consistent support.

People received appropriate and accurate information tailored to their needs. Communication plans were in place. Staff explained care in a way people could understand and adapted their approach where people had specific communication needs. Relatives told us they received regular updates about their family members and that they were contacted promptly when staff had concerns.

The provider and management team enabled people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas. People and relatives said staff listened to them and acted on concerns. Relatives told us the management team were approachable and responsive, and that any concerns raised were acted on quickly. Staff spoke positively about encouraging people to express their wishes and make choices where possible.

Staff made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff took steps to remove barriers to access. Assessments considered people’s individual needs, and reasonable adjustments were made to support people to access care and services. This included adapting care delivery and involving relevant professionals where needed. People and relatives told us the service was responsive and inclusive. The management team demonstrated a strong commitment to ensuring fair access for everyone.

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. For example, staff completed training in equality and diversity to understand and reduce inequalities or prejudices that affected outcomes for people. The registered manager ensured peoples’ social and healthcare needs were fully considered and met. Relatives expressed confidence in the service, saying their loved ones were happy and their needs met.

People were given exceptional support to plan for important life changes, so they could make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. The management team were very committed to ensuring people received support that was responsive and personalised. The nursing team were very skilled at supporting people with a range of complex healthcare needs to reach their full potential. For example, people had moved to the home whose complex healthcare needs external clinicians felt would remain static, however over time staff had supported people to make significant improvement. Some people had regained the ability to eat independently, walk and talked again, which far exceeded the clinicians expectations. Other people had moved to the service with the hope this would be an interim step towards returning home. Staff had effectively worked with them to achieve this goal and they had be able to get to the point whereby they could return either home or to less supported living environments. For some people their goal was to make the best of the time they had left and staff were very adept at supporting people achieve this goal whilst they drew near to the end of their life.