Bellamy House (Empowering U Care)

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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 75 (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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People received person‑centred support that reflected their individual needs, preferences and routines. For example, a relative told us, “There are care reviews on a yearly basis”.

Care plans were treated as live documents and updated throughout the year when changes were identified. Staff were able to describe people’s individual needs, and we saw this was reflected within people’s care records. They also told us they could request updates at any time, so new information was added so everyone supporting the person had accurate information.

One staff member said, “If we notice anything during support, we report it to the manager so it can be added to the care plan.”

Staff had access to clear information on the electronic system and through daily handovers. A whiteboard was also used in staff only areas to highlight reminders, to ensure support remained consistent.

Staff told us building rapport helped them understand people better over time, which helped them provide consistent and personalised support.

We found people’s care records contained personalised information designed to support staff in delivering person‑centred care. This included details about individuals’ likes and dislikes, their preferences around personal care, and any other information important to their daily wellbeing. Updates or changes were documented within the care plan and communicated to staff as required.

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.

People received consistent support that helped them build skills and maintain their independence. Staff told us they worked continuously on developing people’s abilities and adapting support as progress was made. They described positive outcomes, such as improvements in balance and mobility through guided daily routines, and felt proud of the progress people had achieved. For example, a member of staff told us “When (residents name) is walking around the house, he’s now started using the handrails. I can guide him with 1 hand while he uses the rail with the other, and he can now stand and balance much better”.

Support was well coordinated with families and other professionals. One person lived with their family, who remained closely involved in day‑to‑day decisions and care. Staff supported family relationships by assisting with regular visits and attending events such as family gatherings to ensure the person could participate safely and comfortably.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Relatives shared no concerns about how information was received. A relative told us, “If there are any problems they talk about it in the office and sort it and I’ll speak to the office…. They’ll send it over an email, I’ll read it, get in touch and they’ll change it.”

Staff we spoke with supported people to understand information in ways that suited their communication needs. Some people communicated better with pictures, so staff used visual prompts and picture‑based communication when needed.

Staff explained that they supported people to understand information by discussing it in a clear and accessible way. Staff said they sought clarification from professionals on people’s behalf when questions arose. We saw alternative formats, such as large‑print information, were available for people who needed them.

Information about people’s communication needs was included in their care plans and risk assessments and records we viewed confirmed this.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Feedback from relatives and professionals was very positive. We saw an email the provider had received from a family member who said they were delighted with the progress their relative had made, describing improvements in their health, wellbeing and daily routines

One relative told us “He’s been really happy. At the previous place, they’d leave him sitting in a chair all day.” When asked about raising concerns, relatives informed us they had no concerns regarding the service and felt assured they were taken seriously and issues/concerns were resolved. A relative told us “I’ve not had to complain. Sometimes if carers don’t suit him, they don’t go back on the rota. Staff communicate with the office”.

Staff listened to people and their families and involved them in decisions about their care. They told us they encouraged and supported people and relatives to raise any concerns and ensured that information was passed to managers when issues needed further discussion.

We saw that the service had a complaints policy in place, and people and their relatives were informed about how to raise any concerns.

We also reviewed complaint records, which showed that concerns were logged, reviewed, and that appropriate action had been taken.

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

The registered manager explained a 24‑hour on‑call system was in place, with both a team leader and the registered manager available for support. This meant staff could access guidance day or night, ensuring people received consistent support and no one was left without the help they needed.

Staff advocated for people to ensure their care and support reflected their individual preferences and wishes. They promoted people’s rights by encouraging them to be part of their local communities and access opportunities in the same way as others.

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.

Staff explained how they ensured people had equal access to support, opportunities, and outcomes. They understood how people’s health needs, disabilities or personal circumstances could create barriers in daily life, and care plans included information to help staff recognise and respond to these inequalities.

The registered manager described challenging situations where people with learning disabilities were not treated fairly by external professionals and ensured they received equal treatment and appropriate support. They also shared examples of how they promoted people’s rights and choices, including supporting individuals undergoing gender transition by helping them access appropriate services and ensuring their identity and choices were respected.

People were encouraged to take part in activities they enjoyed and participate in their local communities. Staff supported family relationships, attended events when needed and promoted independence so people could achieve positive outcomes at a pace that suited them.

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.

At the time of the inspection, the service was not supporting anyone receiving end‑of‑life care. However, the registered manager explained, when required, the service would follow the person’s care plan and ensure all support was delivered respectfully and in line with their wishes. Staff would work closely with hospice nurses and other professionals to make sure the person was fully supported. The registered manager also told us an end‑of‑life care plan would be put in place, so everyone involved understood what the person wanted and needed, helping ensure their choices and preferences were upheld.