Bradeney House Nursing & Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement.

Requires improvement: This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to regulation 10 dignity and respect.

This service scored 60 (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 did not always treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion, or respect their privacy and dignity. We observed staff did not always protect people’s privacy. We saw staff did not always close bedroom doors when supporting people with dressing. Staff did not always respond in an effective and compassionate way to support people in emotional distress. We observed a person showing distress and shouting out. Staff did not attend or intervene with the person to try to comfort them.

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics. We observed staff calling people by their preferred name. Care plans promoted keeping people safe and independent. Care plans identified clear daily tasks people could achieve. One relative told us, ‘It can be difficult with [relative] as they don’t always want to interact, but staff do try’.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. Some people raised they would like to complete activities outside the home. They could not always access due to requiring support. This was recorded in people’s care plans, providing information to ensure staff understood people’s needs and preferences, such as around eating and drinking. People’s care plans included information about what the person could do for themselves or how they were involved in certain tasks. Relatives told us they could visit and call when they wanted to. There were no restrictions on visiting times and people were able to see who they wanted.

The provider did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. We observed where people were showing signs of distress this was not always identified or responded to in a timely manner. We observed a person sitting in the lounge vocalising discomfort and distress arising from the environment they were sitting in. Staff told us this was normal for the person, however they did not spend extra time with the person or try techniques to reduce their distress. One person told us, ‘I feel the staff are good, we have to wait sometimes, but not for long’.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff. Staff told us the passing away of a previous manager had impacted them. Staff told us the provider had arranged support from counsellors and had given time to staff to speak up. One staff member told us, ‘The provider is very supportive and caring, I feel very valued’. Staff told us about the training they had been provided with and how recently they had received additional training courses. Staff were positive about the deputy manager and how they completed regular supervisions and communicated well. Staff had regular team meetings.