Bromley Place

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.

This is the first assessment for this registered service. This key question has been rated good.

This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (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.

Care plans were person-centred, clearly detailing people’s individual likes and dislikes. When speaking with the registered manager and the support manager, it was clear they were aware of people’s individual preferences as well as their individual backgrounds. Staff told us once they had read people’s care plans, they understood peoples’ histories, risks and support needs, which helped them provide appropriate care and support to individual people.

Staff told us they asked people on a daily basis what they would like to do, including what they would like to eat. Plans were then organised around people’s wishes, ensuring people had choice and control over their daily activities.

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.

Staff rotas showed a consistent staff group, which demonstrated continuity of care in which people’s needs were being met by staff who knew them and their needs well. We saw appropriate steps were taken to manage the transition of roles and responsibilities between the registered manager and support manager. This included providing clear communication and guidance to both staff and people, helping to maintain consistency and reassurance during a period of organisational change within the management structure.

Documentation relating to people’s care and support was up-to-date, detailed and accessible. This ensured the service could provide other professionals with information required to provide consistent care in the event care needed to be delivered by another provider. For example, if a person was admitted to hospital.

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

The provider ensured people received appropriate, accurate and up‑to‑date information in formats tailored to their individual needs. Information was shared in ways that people could easily understand. For example, care plans were available in easy‑read formats, and visual aids were used to support daily routines. We saw pictures incorporated into activity schedules and meal plans both within people’s flats and in the staff office. This approach made information accessible and supported people to engage with and understand the details of their care.

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.

The service demonstrated they listened to and involved people in shaping their care. We saw clear evidence of staff proactively seeking feedback from people via quality survey feedback forms. This information was used to inform improvements to both care delivery and communication. An accessible complaints policy and procedure was in place, ensuring people knew how to raise concerns in a way that suited their individual needs. The service also actively gathered feedback from relatives and external professionals through quality assurance questionnaires.

There were frequent meetings held, where discussions around raising concerns, expressing feelings and wishes were discussed with people.

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

We saw evidence to show support from external health care professionals was sought for people when needed and appropriate actions were taken following this support. One person told us when support from health or social care professionals was provided, staff delivered this in a timely manner. We saw evidence to show people accessed the community on a regular basis and participated in activities of their choosing when they wished to.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in their care or outcomes, and tailored support to ensure their needs were understood and met. This demonstrated the service’s commitment to promoting fairness, inclusion and person‑centred practice in line with the Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture principles for learning disability services.

Staff tailored care so people experienced comparable outcomes regardless of disability, health condition, communication needs or background. This included adapting communication methods, using visual prompts, simplifying information, and providing additional reassurance where needed.

People’s care and support was planned to ensure their individual needs could be met. People’s specific dietary needs were met and their religious and cultural beliefs were respected.

An equality and diversity policy was in place, and staff had completed training in equality, diversity and human rights. This helped staff understand the barriers some people may face and strengthened their ability to deliver equitable support. A staff member told us, “We do not treat people all the same. I offer a person‑centred approach and give specific care to person A which may be different to person B.” This demonstrated their awareness of providing support based on individual strengths, needs and experiences.

There was evidence of partnership working with external health professionals to address health needs promptly. Staff sought timely advice from GPs, and community mental health teams when concerns were identified.

People were not always 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.

There was nobody in receipt of end-of-life at the time of the assessment. When we spoke with the management team, they shared their aspirations for people’s next steps, and how they wished to support people as their needs changed. However, although care plans outlined people’s current identified aims and outcomes, they did not capture people’s long-term goals or what was important for them over time. For example, the management team spoke about how they believed one person could aim towards living in a supported living environment in the future and described how staff are already supporting them to build skills to work towards achieving this. However, this forward-looking goal was not included in their care plan.