Bamburgh Supported Living

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 inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.
 

This service scored 61 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and support choices. Whilst staff were able to tell us about people’s needs and preferences, people's care plans contained generic information and lacked detail to demonstrate how person-centred care should be delivered.

Care plans described people as being autistic or having a learning disability in broad, generalised terms, rather than explaining their individual strengths, needs and preferred methods of support. Several care plans contained generic aims and goals, and some included information that was not relevant to the person. Despite these concerns, feedback from health professionals suggested staff understood how to deliver personalised care. One professional told us, “It is clear that the team know [person] extremely well” and “Support is tailored to the individual's wishes, preferences, strengths, and changing needs.”

Following our feedback, the provider responded promptly to review and update care plan documentation to ensure it more fully reflected people’s individualised needs and preferences.
 

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and care was joined up and supported continuity. The provider made appropriate referrals and worked in partnership with other healthcare services where necessary to promote consistency in people's support. Staff shared relevant information with health and social care professionals and took action when people's needs changed to help ensure they received appropriate support.

The provider did not always fully document people’s communication needs in order to ensure information was supplied in formats tailored to their individual needs. People's communication needs were recorded. However, these records did not always explain what the communication meant or how staff should respond.

Guidance for supporting people during periods of distress did not always explore what people may be communicating. Care plans did not consistently record whether people used alternative forms of communication, visual aids or other tools to support their understanding and decision-making. This meant staff did not always have clear information about how to support people in line with their communication needs and preferences.
 

The provider did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care and support. Whilst complaints and feedback processes were in place and keyworker meetings were held, records were brief and lacked sufficient detail. This meant the provider could not demonstrate how people were supported to express their views or make decisions about their care. It was not clear how their feedback was used to drive improvements.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The provider supported people to access healthcare services when required and took account of their individual support needs when planning appointments.

The provider was able to demonstrate some examples of promoting equality in people’s experiences and outcomes. They worked with health and social care professionals to remove barriers and adapt support to meet individual needs. This enabled a person to continue living independently in their own home, in line with their wishes. One health professional told us, “[The provider] are doing everything possible to keep the resident safe and transition into their own property when their care needs changed.”

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.

The provider had not consistently explored or recorded people's preferences for future care and support, including their end-of-life wishes. Although the provider told us they were aware of people's preferences, these had not always been documented within care plans. Following our feedback, the provider told us this information would be recorded.