Bletchley House Residential Care and Nursing Home

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 64 (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 treatment choices and they did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. For example, some people’s care plans contained limited information about their likes, dislikes and preferences. It wasn’t always clear where people had contributed to their care plans. However, we observed people had personalised their bedrooms and were offered choices, for example with their meals and if they would like to participate in group activities.

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. Staff worked closely with health care professionals and records showed effective partnership working had taken place during reviews of people’s care. Staff accurately recorded information and shared with staff and relevant professionals such as the GP.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. For example, we saw visual aids were available but not always used effectively. Care plans did not always contain information to support staff with people’s communication needs. For example, one person’s care plan noted they were blind, however their communication care plan did not contain detailed information about alternative methods of communication or aids the person may find useful. The person told us staff would not always announce themselves when they entered which caused them some anxiety and they wanted staff to tell them when they entered as they had difficulty seeing faces to identify them.

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. For example, the provider used regular surveys to gather the views of people and their relatives. They also used a ‘you said, we did’ board, this gave monthly updates on how the provider had responded to feedback and actions they had taken.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Other professionals were contacted for advice and guidance where required, for example, where people and staff needed more specialist support with people’s skin health. One person told us, “I do have visits from chiropodist, but I look after my hand nails myself, they also called dentist to check my dentures.”

Staff and leaders did not always actively listen 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. We found activities and engagement opportunities varied in the service. Where people were able and chose to leave their rooms, there was a range of communal activities available to participate in, for example, we observed people enjoy a coffee morning with local volunteers. However, where people were unable to leave their room or chose not to, there were limited opportunities for engagement. This meant people may be at increased risk of social isolation. The provider was responsive to our feedback and developed an action plan to address these concerns. We will check this at our next inspection.

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.End of life care plans were in place and contained detailed information about people’s wishes and preferences for staff to follow when they reached the end of their life.