Bembridge House

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 service since it changed provider. This key question has been rated 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 care. During our site visit, we observed staff supporting people to take part in individual activities in line with their preferences. For example, we observed one person dancing with a staff member, and another person playing a game, and another person with a sensory item. People’s bedrooms were decorated to their preferences. We reviewed some feedback from a healthcare professional which stated, “[Person’s] care plan is robust and person centred. His communication plan demonstrates how well staff know him. This part of the care plan was particularly valuable in providing a picture of who [person] is.”

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. The manager explained, “We’ve got good links with the local church, individuals go to the [local social group]. We have in-house parties, where families are invited, and we use the [local] community centre. We have a consistent staff team; some are on maternity leave. One staff is leaving, but we are retaining our staff.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. There were easy read policies for people who require these, such as for safeguarding, complaints, MCA, and health and safety. This supported people’s understanding to raise a safeguarding concern or complaint. People had detailed information in their care plans about how people liked to be communicated with, and staff worked in line with this. Staff told us they received training in how to communicate effectively.

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. People were fully involved in their care and support and were at the centre of their care. For example, people had goals they were working towards and were involved in the reviews of their care. There was a complaints policy which outlined procedures, which was also available in easy read format for those who required it. Where complaints had been raised, the policy had been followed, and the complaints were responded to appropriately.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The service had wide corridors and was spacious which meant it was fully accessible for people. Staff were available to support people at any time of the day with healthcare needs.

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 ensured people received equity by knowing them and their needs. One partner told us, “Staff know the [people] and their conditions extremely well. The [people] have learning disabilities and despite difficulties communicating their needs, the staff know what is normal for them and are the best judges at when something is wrong. They make reasonable adjustments to the best of their ability.” This was supported by feedback from people’s relatives. The manager told us they supported equity for people by advocating for them and involving families in open communication. The manager explained, “The learning disability liaison team are a Godsend to us. They are so supportive. Staff have become better at advocating for people. They are not afraid to challenge. Just because people have learning disabilities, they still deserve exactly the same [opportunities].”

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future. People had goals recorded within their care and support plans. The manager explained, “We identified [person] didn’t cope well with education, but we found some the courses that are run by [the local authority], and we enrolled her on to them. She got a certificate.” The manager also explained how they had enrolled people on to activity classes they enjoyed.