Bearwardcote Hall Residential Home

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 64 (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 had made improvements in ensuring people were involved in their care and treatment decisions; however, further progress was needed to consistently place people at the centre of their care.

At this inspection, we found the provider had made some improvements in delivering person-centred care since the previous inspection. Care plans now contained more detailed information about people's life histories, and individual needs. The provider had recognised the need to further strengthen person-centred approaches and had developed plans to introduce personalised goals and outcomes, as well as increase involvement with people and their relatives in care planning and review processes. The provider had also taken steps to improve activities and opportunities for engagement. However, feedback from relatives was mixed. Some relatives felt their family members had access to meaningful activities and were supported to take part in things they enjoyed, while others felt there remained limited opportunities for personalised engagement. Overall, improvements had been made since the previous inspection, and the provider had recognised areas requiring further development. However, further work was needed to ensure person-centred care was consistently embedded across the service and that people and their relatives were actively involved in shaping and reviewing care and support.

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. Improvements had been made since the previous inspection. Care plans more consistently reflected people's individual needs, and staff demonstrated a good understanding of the people they supported. The provider had strengthened induction arrangements and improved oversight of staff training. Although agency staff continued to be used at times to maintain staffing levels, there was a stable core staff team which helped promote continuity of care. We found appropriate and timely action was taken when people's needs changed, including referrals to relevant health and social care professionals to ensure people received the support they required. Relatives spoke positively about communication from the service and told us they were kept informed about changes in their family member's care and wellbeing.

The provider did not always ensure information was provided in accessible, personalised and up-to-date formats to support people to understand and engage with their care and the service.

Accessible information was available throughout the home and supported people's orientation and awareness of their surroundings. This included bedroom door signage, information relating to the date, season, weather, activities and menus, as well as notices promoting inclusion.

However, improvements were needed to ensure accessible information was more meaningful and demonstrated how people's views influenced service delivery. We found the ‘You Said, We Did’ display contained limited evidence of feedback being acted upon, reducing opportunities for people to see how their contributions had informed improvements. While appropriate signage was in place to support orientation and infection prevention and control measures, further work was needed to develop accessible information and strengthen evidence of engagement with people using the service.

The provider had made improvements in responding to complaints and engaging with relatives; however, systems were not yet consistently embedded in ensuring people's views and feedback were fully reflected in care planning and service development.

Improvements had been made since the previous inspection in the way complaints and concerns were managed. The provider had strengthened oversight of complaints, and records showed concerns were investigated more thoroughly, with actions taken to address issues raised. Relatives told us they knew how to raise concerns. Opportunities were available for relatives to share their views through relative meetings and informal discussions with staff and management.

However, further work was needed to ensure the views of people using the service and their relatives were consistently captured and reflected within care planning documentation. Although mechanisms were in place to gather feedback, records did not always demonstrate how people's preferences, wishes and feedback had informed the planning and review of their care. This meant the provider could not always evidence how people and those important to them had contributed to decisions about their support.

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

Improvements had been made since the previous inspection. Care plans contained more information about people's individual needs and the support they required. Staff demonstrated an understanding of people's diverse needs and there was evidence people were able to access appropriate care and support. Emergency arrangements had also improved, with clearer systems in place to support staff when issues arose outside normal working hours. The provider had also taken steps to promote equality, diversity and inclusion within the service, and staff spoke positively about the culture of the home.

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 provider had strengthened its approach to equality, diversity and inclusion. Care plans demonstrated greater consideration of people's individual needs, including their protected characteristics and reasonable adjustments to promote equitable outcomes. Staff were able to describe how they supported people in a way that respected their individuality, preferences and rights. Relatives told us they felt able to raise concerns, and there was evidence of improvements in the way concerns were managed and investigated.

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.

Following our previous inspection the provider had ensured peoples care plans had been updated to include more detailed planning for the future, including arrangements and preferences relating to end-of-life care. Staff had now received training in end-of-life and palliative care. Relatives told us they had been involved in discussing future care for their family members.