Bush Rest 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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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.

People were not consistently supported to maintain their interests and undertake meaningful activity. Some people told us they would like more to do during the day and the opportunity to go out. A person told us, “I like doing word searches. We have a singer sometimes. I haven’t been out for a very long time. They don’t take us out.” We saw there were large parts of the day where people were not engaged in any activity. However, staff told us they tried to do something with people in the afternoons, and we saw staff arranged a quiz during the afternoon which some people enjoyed. People received person-centred care and had regular reviews to consider relevant changes to their needs. People told us they directed their own care and support and made decisions about what they did and when they did it. A person told us, “I go to bed when I want. I can go myself.” Another person told us, “Sometimes I have a bed bath, sometimes I have a shower.” Reviews were undertaken, and people and their relatives were involved in these. A relative told us, “We’ve have had regular reviews about [person’s name] care with the manager to discuss their care in general.” The manager told us people, and their relatives were fully involved in planning people’s care and support and providing the guidance for staff on how people preferred to have their needs met. Staff understood people’s individual preferences and were observed using the information in peoples care plans to offer support. For example, when supporting people with transfers and meals. The manager told us the electronic care planning system enabled them to capture information about people’s preferences and wishes; records we saw supported this.

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’s care and support needs and how these were met were documented in an electronic care record. Where required information was shared with other health professionals and advice on how to meet people’s needs from health professionals was also captured. Where needed people were referred to other agencies without delay and there was evidence staff worked in partnership with other agencies to ensure people had their needs met.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The manager had systems in place to ensure people received information which was tailored to meet people’s individual needs. People had their communication needs assessed, and care plans put in place to meet these needs. Staff were aware of how people needed to be communicated with, and we saw people’s needs were considered throughout the inspection. For example, a person’s care plan stated staff needed to be close to the person when speaking with them as they had a visual and hearing impairment. We saw staff communicate regularly with the person throughout the day following the advice in the care plan.

The provider had systems in place for people and their relatives to share feedback about their care including a complaints procedure. People and their relatives told us there were opportunities to share feedback and they felt able to make complaints about the service if needed. A relative told us, “We have not had to make any complaints but if we needed to we would.” Another relative told us, “There are relative’s meetings and there have been questionnaires we can complete.” Staff understood how to support people and their relatives if they wanted to make a complaint. They described documenting what was said to them and reporting this to the manager for investigation. The manager told us they had a complaints system in place and could share examples of how they had responded to people’s complaints including how they investigated, provided a response and used the information to identify any learning to make improvements. We saw where complaints had been received these had been managed in line with the provider’s complaints policy.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The environment had been considered to meet the needs of people. We saw seating areas were arranged in small clusters allowing people to spend time chatting and having conversations. The provider had ensured there was equipment in place and adaptations to support people with accessing bathroom and toilet facilities. Where people needed access to healthcare professionals staff supported people to ensure this was in place.

The provider had systems in place to ensure they monitored people’s outcomes. Reviews of peoples care needs were undertaken monthly and additional checks on aspects of people’s health were undertaken. For example, regular audits of people’s weight meant people were referred to relevant professionals if they began to lose weight. Audits of falls enabled reviews of risk assessments, equipment to be put in place and referrals to local falls services to be made.The manager understood people with specific needs may find it hard to express themselves and they ensured there were systems in place to support them in managing their health needs.

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. The manager and staff confirmed nobody was at the end of their life at the time of the inspection. However, we saw staff had received training in death, dying and bereavement. The manager described how staff would use this training, along with individual end of life care plans to support people at the end of their life. The electronic care records system enabled people to make plans for the future. This included information about individual wishes in relation to the place they wished to receive end of life care and their preferences for resuscitation.