You are here

Brant Howe Residential Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 5 January 2013
Date of Publication: 12 February 2013
Inspection Report published 12 February 2013 PDF

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 5 January 2013, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service, talked with carers and / or family members and talked with staff.

Our judgement

People's privacy and dignity were respected, and their views were taken into account in the provision of their care.

Reasons for our judgement

We observed that people's privacy and dignity was upheld and staff sought their views to influence the care, treatment and support offered. One person said, “I was pleased that staff listened to what I wanted when I came here and I was made to feel comfortable. I can tell them about my views and wishes.” Another person said, " No one comes into my room without knocking first, my privacy is respected."

We saw in people's personal records there was information about their likes and dislikes and preferences, and how they would like their care to be provided. People had signed their initial assessment and the resulting care plan that demonstrated their involvement and agreement. This included the person's preferred name and identified the person's usual routine. For example one person we spoke with said, “They (care staff) don’t interfere but they are always there when you need them and they ask you how you would like things done.”

People told us their care workers always treated them with respect and called them by their preferred name. People spoke positively about how they were able to make decisions about their care, spend their time and enjoyed shared interests and social events with others. Staff spoke in a friendly way and there was a relaxed and homely atmosphere. We observed sensitive and skilled exchanges between staff and people living in the home as support was offered. We noted that people, wherever possible, were prompted and assisted to do task for themselves. Staff we spoke with said this was an important part of keeping people active and independent and this ensured that dignity and self respect of people was promoted.

People we spoke with told us they were able to have a say in the running of the home, some people told us they were involved in a residents’ group. Others said they were very comfortable approaching the manager and the head of care, saying, “The manager is always around, she’s very hands on and always takes time to ask you about things, and what we would like doing.” Relatives also told us that they were kept informed and involved in important decisions about the care of their relative and aspects on the running of the home.