Byron Court Care 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 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 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, numerous people told us they did not like the food at the home and wanted alternatives, which had already been raised with the provider and senior leaders previously. Some of the wording in people’s care plans was not always clear or personalised. We also observed a carer standing over a person when assisting them with a meal, which was not a personalised or dignified way to engage with them. We raised this immediately with the provider and shared the feedback regarding the food. We saw immediate consultations had begun around the food, and care plans were amended to ensure the wording was more personalised.

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. People were getting the correct amount of care and support. Referrals were made when needed, and we saw the staff has spend time chasing some of these up. Some people were staying at the home for a period of respite, and were working closely with staff, their family members and discharge social workers to ensure they would safely return home.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Some policies were provided in additional formats to support people’s understanding. The provider confirmed they would make polices available in alternative languages if needed to enable people to understand their rights regarding these.

Despite some negative feedback regarding the food, overall, 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. Questionnaires were sent out to people and their families every 12 months and results were analysed and feedback shared. There was a working progress in relation to the feedback regarding the food, however the last feedback survey was mixed regarding the meals at Byron Court.

The provider did not always make sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Some people told us they had asked to see a dentist, and this has not been actioned. Additionally, a relative told us they were still waiting for feedback from the SALT team for their relative. Also, some people said they felt they would like to access the community more however, this was not facilitated on their behalf. Following our inspection, we have been updated indicating people have been consulted with around this, and healthcare teams have been contacted on people’s behalf.

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. Where appropriate, people had detailed plans in place regarding arrangements in their final days. Where people were being supported at the end of their life, family members were kept well informed, and there was a detailed pathway for each person. Staff were trained in end of life care and looked after people with dignity and respect.

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. Where appropriate, people had detailed plans in place regarding arrangements in their final days. Where people were being supported at the end of their life, family members were kept well informed, and there was a detailed pathway for each person. Staff were trained in end of life care and looked after people with dignity and respect.