Briarfield

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 remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 65 (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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated people warmly and respectfully and supported them in a way that promoted their wellbeing and comfort.
We observed positive interactions between staff and people using the service. Interactions in communal areas were kind, respectful and person-centred, and people appeared relaxed and comfortable in the presence of staff. Staff told us there was a culture of kindness within the service and spoke positively about the support provided to people.
Relatives also spoke highly of the care provided. One relative told us, "[Staff] look after them really well and they are cared for brilliantly."
 

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure their care, support and treatment reflected their needs, preferences and unique ways of communicating. Staff understood people's individual backgrounds, likes and dislikes and supported them to make choices about their lives.
People were supported to celebrate birthdays and the provider created opportunities for people to invite people from other services within the organisation to these celebrations, helping people maintain social connections and celebrate events that were important to them.
The provider supported staff to communicate effectively with people. Staff received Makaton training, which uses signs and speech to support communication for people who may not use words to communicate. People had communication care plans in place which described their individual communication preferences and provided staff with guidance on how best to support them. The registered manager told us, "The people we support all have different communication styles and preferred ways of interacting. It is important that staff understand and respect these preferences."
People were supported to make choices in their day-to-day lives, and their preferences were considered when planning care and support. One professional told us, "My patient has food preferences which may not be the most preferable in managing [health condition]. [Registered Manager] discussed making reasonable adjustments to dietary intake and supporting with meal options and food that the service user likes, whilst trying to support with [health condition] management. They have been offering multiple choices to ensure nutrition and hydration whilst considering the person's preferences. [Person] was involved in all discussions regarding this at the review."
The provider recognised people's individual preferences and choices. However, records relating to people's aspirations and longer-term goals were not always fully developed, and staff would benefit from further support to consistently help people identify and achieve outcomes that were important to them.

The provider did not always promote people's independence, choice and control in a structured way. Although people were supported to make day-to-day decisions, it was not always clear how choices about activities, goals and opportunities were planned or reviewed with them.
During our visit, people were generally busy and engaged in activities in the community. However, records did not clearly demonstrate how people were involved in planning these activities or how their preferences and choices were reviewed over time. This made it difficult to assess whether people were consistently being offered opportunities that reflected their wishes and aspirations.
However, staff knew people well and supported them to make choices throughout the day. Care plans identified areas where people could maintain their independence, particularly in relation to personal care, and people appeared comfortable making decisions about their daily lives. One relative told us, “[Staff] do all they can to help [person] be independent, [person] does what [they] want to do.”
It was less clear how people were encouraged to develop independent living skills, such as participating in household tasks or meal preparation.
 

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 discomfort, concern or distress.
Throughout the assessment we observed many positive examples of staff responding promptly to people's needs and providing reassurance, comfort and support when required. Staff knew people well and were able to recognise when people needed assistance, encouragement or emotional support.
However, on the first day of the assessment, one person was observed calling out for a prolonged period without a timely response from staff. The person had recently returned from hospital and was awaiting surgery. Staff told us the person sometimes made sounds that could appear distressed when they were not. However, on the second day of the assessment the person's distress appeared to have increased. Following discussion with inspectors, the registered manager agreed additional medical input was required. Subsequent adjustments to the person's pain management resulted in a noticeable improvement, and the person appeared calmer during our next visit. This indicated the person's pain may not have been fully recognised at the earliest opportunity and suggested their communication and support plans may benefit from review to ensure staff have clear guidance on recognising and responding to changes in their presentation and wellbeing.
 

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of staff and supported them to deliver person-centred care.
One staff member spoke positively about the support they received and told us, “I feel well supported by [registered manager], [they] are a very good and approachable manager.”
The provider had a range of initiatives in place to support staff wellbeing. Staff could access wellbeing meetings and use the organisation's wellbeing app, which provided information and guidance on a range of physical and mental health conditions. The app also offered access to confidential counselling services via telephone and messaging.
Staff could request flexible working arrangements to help balance their work and personal commitments. The provider also had trained Mental Health First Aiders who could offer support, guidance and signposting to appropriate services.
Staff were invited to complete annual feedback surveys about the service. Although uptake had been low, the provider was developing plans to take a more targeted approach to improve response rates and ensure staff views were captured.