Broughton Lodge

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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.

People received care that was responsive to their individual needs, preferences, and wishes. The registered manager knew people well and had written people’s care plans. They were person centred and reflected people’s choices. The registered manager had been transferring information to the providers new electronic care system. They were also working with the staff team to develop people’s care plans as they knew people well.

There were some shortfalls in how the service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was not always joined-up, flexible or supportive of choice and continuity.

A timetable of activities was in place; however, during our first visit, we observed limited activity provision, particularly for people who remained in their rooms. On the second day, a movie afternoon was held in the communal lounge, which was well-attended and enjoyed by those who participated. However, it was noted that people who remained in their rooms did not have access to any alternative activities during this time. This is an area for improvement, and the registered manager was aware of the need to enhance meaningful engagement for all people at the home and was working with staff to make changes.

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

We observed staff communicating and interacting with people in a way they understood. This included speaking to them clearly, at their eye level and allowing them time to take in the information and respond at their own speed.

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 asked for their views. As a small home there were regular opportunities for people and families to speak to the registered manager and staff. The provider also spoke with people at their monthly provider audit meeting to gain their feedback.

Relatives’ feedbackwas gatheredthrough surveys. One concern raised in the last survey was activity provision. This is an area the registered manager is looking to improve.

The registered manager told us and records confirmed, no complaints had been received at the home.

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

People had access to the care and support they required and were happy with this. Records showed people were supported to attend appointments and a range of healthcare professionals visited the home regularly. Records of visits were included in people’s care records and the staff followed instructions.

One person displayed distress and behaviours that may be seen as challenging. The staff team worked with the community mental health team to support the person as needed.

Care plans were regularly reviewed to identify any changes in a person’s care needs so the appropriate support could be found if needed. This included making appropriate referrals to external professionals as needed.

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 spoke positively about the staff that supported them and felt involved in planning their care and support. People did not experience discrimination or inequality in how their care was delivered and the support they received.

Equality and diversity training was part of the provider's mandatory training requirements and people were cared for without discrimination and in a way that respected their differences.

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.

People, and their relatives where appropriate, were supported to make informed choices about their care and plan their future care.

Where people were nearing the end of their lives, staff had worked with their GP to ensure there were appropriate medicines prescribed and available to manage any pain they might have.