Bainbridge Court

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.

People's care plans reflected their physical, emotional and mental health needs and these had been effectively assessed. People's care plans were person-centred and provided clear and descriptive guidance to staff about how to support people to meet their often-complex needs. One relative said, “I think the main impression is that staff really care, they really want to be responsive and help.”

Relatives and professionals we spoke to said that they were regularly involved in planning and making shared decisions about peoples care and treatment. One relative said, “We talk with staff a lot and they are very willing to listen. The staff are very open. I sent it specialist spoon and fork with thicker grips so you can load the fork then hand it to (person) and he will eat from it. I’ve been showing staff how to use it, and the majority have picked up on it.”

Leaders and staff took a collaborative approach that focussed on people’s quality of life and outcomes that were evidence based. Comprehensive and personalised case studies were used proactively to support people through their journey in care.

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.

Continuity of people’s care resulted from staff working consistently and meeting their assessed needs. Effective partnership working with external agencies meant that care was delivered effectively, and people’s health care needs were responded to. One professional said, “It was evident that the staff communicated well with one another to guarantee continuity of care.”

People’s care and treatment was delivered in a way that meet their assessed needs from services that were coordinated and responsive. Care was coordinated and delivered to those most at risk. One professional said, “The staff worked in conjunction with professionals to address individual needs and preferences, which were often complex in nature.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information that could be formatted and tailored to individual needs. People’s individual needs to have information in an accessible way were identified, recorded, highlighted and shared.

The provider used easy read documents to support people voice their opinions, such as making a complaint or within welcome packs for people who were new to the home. Staff supported people with communication software that used symbols to aid comprehension and understanding. Some people at the home used PECS (Picture Exchange Communication System). This is communication system that uses pictures to help people with limited, or no, verbal language skills to express their needs, wants, and thoughts. People were supported to communicate their needs and choices through Makaton and other visual methods. The manager said, “In our PBS meetings we do sign of the month where we teach the staff the signs. We concentrate on signs that we know matter to the service users, and we teach staff these and refresh the ones we the previous month.”

People's communication levels were assessed. Care plans detailed how people were able to convey their needs, and any support people would need to do so. People’s sensory needs were comprehensively assessed and reviewed.

Information about people that was collected and shared met data protection legislation requirements. Staff received GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) training. Information was stored securely within the site office in locked cabinets, while electronic information was protected within password protected care systems.

People know how to give feedback about their experiences of care and support including how to raise any concerns or issues and can do so in a range of accessible ways.

Staff used a variety of communication tools to gain people’s feedback and views. People were supported in quarterly resident meetings, regular key worker sessions and with feedback surveys to give their experiences. Easy read meeting minutes were provided for people. Monthly meetings were held with family members. We saw daily choice boards in place so people could use symbols to indicate what food they wanted and what activities they wished to take part in. The manager stated that they were looking to make key worker sessions more robust to empower staff to improve communication and provide updates to family members.

The provider had completed, You Said, We Did reports that detailed what feedback and changes people had asked for, and how the provider had responded. For example, people had said that they did not like the garden area, so the provider has provided more furniture to encourage people to use the outdoor space.

Relatives confirmed that they were listened to and involved in their loved ones’ care. One relative said, “(Staff) do communicate. We have a group site, and we are updated. We couldn’t be happier.” Another relative said, “They listen to me when I make requests.”

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

People were able to access healthcare, treatment and support when they needed it. Staff ensured that timely referrals were made for specialist support, while people could regularly access local health support when they required it.

People care and treatment was accessible, in line with best practice, quality standards and legal requirements, including those on equality and human rights. This included making reasonable adjustments for people with learning disabilities, addressing communication barriers and having accessible premises.

Physical premises and equipment were accessible. People were given support to overcome barriers to ensure equal access through consistent approach to meeting people’s individual communication needs. Observations of environment were positive with people having access to a spacious, secure environment.

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.

People’s care, treatment and support promoted equality, removed barriers or delays

and protects their rights. People’s care planning was consistent, and the provider sought to provide a person-centred service that acknowledged people’s differences and complex needs. The manager and provider were alert to potential inequality issues.

Each person care plan identified any equality needs and how these impacted their care needs, while staff understood their role in ensuring people's equality and diversity needs were met. Staff received training in diversity, equality and inclusion.

The provider had considered and assessed people’s advanced wishes for the future, when this was appropriate. Peoples care plan recorded where people had DNACPR (Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation) or advanced directives in place.

The manager acknowledged the reluctance of some younger adults with learning disabilities and their loved ones in discussing end of life support. When a new person moved the home, end of life wishes were sought as part of the assessment process. The manager stated that they have not had to support anyone with end-of-life care at Bainbridge Court, but understood the need to involve families, respect peoples advanced wishes and collaborate with professionals on medical treatment.