Broom Lane

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question outstanding. At this assessment the rating has remained outstanding.

This meant people were truly respected and valued as individuals; and empowered as partners in their care in an exceptional service.

This service scored 90 (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 was exceptional at treating people with kindness, empathy and compassion and in how they respected people’s privacy and dignity. Staff always treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People described positive and caring relationships with staff and consistently told us they were treated well. One relative said, “They’re great… anything I report gets dealt with straight away,” reflecting a culture where people and those important to them felt listened to and taken seriously.

People appeared relaxed and comfortable in the presence of staff, indicating familiarity and trusting relationships.

Observations confirmed a calm and supportive environment, where staff interactions were consistently respectful and responsive. Staff engaged with people in a way that recognised their preferences, offering choice naturally and using explanation and reassurance rather than directive approaches. People were spoken to directly and included in interactions, and there was no evidence of impersonal or task focused care.

Dignity and privacy were maintained in practice. Staff supported people discreetly with personal care and respected personal space within shared environments. There were no observed concerns relating to exposure, embarrassment or disregard for people’s dignity.

Staff understood the importance of compassionate and respectful care and adapted their approach to meet individual needs. Leaders promoted these values through clear expectations, and care planning reflected people’s preferences and routines, supporting consistency in how care was delivered.
 

The provider treated people as individuals and was exceptional in how they made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. The provider took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People consistently described being able to make decisions about their daily lives, including how they spent their time and the activities they took part in. One person said, “I do whatever I want,” reflecting a high level of autonomy and confidence in expressing their preferences.

Relatives confirmed that support was tailored to the individual and responsive to what mattered to the person. One relative told us, “[Person] has a particular day… he decides where he wants to go on the day, and staff take him wherever he wants,” demonstrating how care was shaped around individual choice and preference.

People appeared comfortable and familiar with staff, and relationships reflected a clear understanding of individual preferences and communication styles. Staff supported people at their own pace and respected their decisions, including when they chose not to engage.

Observations confirmed that staff consistently treated people as individuals. Staff used preferred names and communication styles, engaged in natural interactions and adapted their approach to reflect each person’s preferences. There was no evidence of task-focused or standardised care, and people were actively involved in interactions.

Care planning supported personalised and flexible care delivery, with clear information about people’s preferences, routines and communication needs. Processes enabled staff to adapt support in real time, ensuring care reflected the person rather than a fixed routine.
 

The provider was exceptional at promoting people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People consistently described being able to make their own decisions about how they spent their time, including activities, food and access to the community. They told us they felt in control of their day-to-day lives and were supported to follow their preferences. Relatives reinforced this and described how staff respected people’s decisions. One relative said, “If he decides not to go out… they won’t pressure him and simply won’t go,” demonstrating that people’s choices were upheld, including decisions not to participate.

Observations showed people making choices naturally throughout the day and engaging at their own pace. Staff offered options and responded flexibly to people’s preferences, using explanation and reassurance rather than directive approaches. There was no evidence of unnecessary restriction or staff led control.

Care planning and governance processes supported independence and autonomy. Plans reflected individual preferences and routines, and communication tools were used to enable people to participate in decisions. Systems were in place to review any restrictions, ensuring these were lawful, proportionate and regularly reconsidered. Tenancy-based processes reinforced that people had control over their home environment and daily living arrangements.

Staff understood their role in promoting independence and described adapting support based on people’s responses, including stopping or modifying activities where individuals chose not to continue. Leaders reinforced expectations that care should be shaped around the person and not the service.

As a result, people were supported to maintain control over their lives and engage in activities and relationships that mattered to them. Care was delivered in a way that promoted independence and enabled people to exercise choice consistently.
 

The provider was exceptional in how they listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

People were supported according to their current presentation. Care plans showed that staff adjusted routines and expectations when people became anxious or distressed. This meant people were supported at their own pace, which reduced pressure and helped prevent escalation.

Staff followed clear frameworks to guide their response. Positive Behavioural Support plans identified triggers, early warning signs and appropriate actions. Behavioural monitoring systems, including incident reporting, supported consistency. This ensured that staff responded in a structured and predictable way, reducing the risk of inconsistent or delayed support.

Care was adjusted when needs changed. Records showed changes to routines, environments and staffing levels. Staff recognised changes in presentation and acted appropriately. This meant people received support that reflected their immediate needs and reduced the risk of further distress.

Response systems were effective in managing immediate need. Data was consistently collected and informed decision-making, with evidence that patterns of behaviour were recognised and used to adapt support. There were clear examples of this information being used to anticipate when people might require additional support or intervention, supporting a proactive approach to care.

Outcome evidence showed that staff responded effectively to incidents of distress. This supported stability and reduced the likelihood of escalation in many cases, with evidence that responsive approaches contributed to sustained improvements in how people experienced support.
 

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff, and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff described a supportive and approachable team culture. They said managers and colleagues were available to provide advice and support when needed. Staff spoke positively about working together as a team and helping each other in day-to-day practice.

Staff felt able to raise concerns and ask for support. They described receiving support following incidents and during periods of absence, including regular contact and help when returning to work. Staff said this support helped them feel valued and able to continue in their roles.

Staff received supervision and took part in team meetings where they could reflect on their work and discuss any issues. Leaders were present within the service and knew staff well, which meant they were able to respond to individual needs and provide support when required.

People benefited from a staff team who felt supported and worked well together. Staff were able to focus on providing consistent, person centred care, and people experienced support from staff who were confident and familiar with their needs.

Staff experiences showed they were supported in their roles, and this contributed to stable staffing and continuity of care for people.