The Bungalow

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 75 (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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and support choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. People and their relatives were involved in making decisions about the care provided and their views and engagement were documented within the care plans. People’s care plans were person-centred, detailed and reflected what was important to them. People were encouraged to lead a full and active life. People were supported to enjoy a range of activities which were personalised to their preferences. Where people did not communicate verbally, the provider encouraged staff to explore new activities with people and observe and reflect on their engagement and enjoyment.

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. The provider had identified potential barriers which impacted the quality of people’s care, such as issues relating to funding and eligibility for equipment. The provider was able to demonstrate how they had taken action to remove or mitigate the impact of these barriers to improve people’s experience of care.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to people’s individual needs. People had detailed communication plans in place which provided guidance about how to support decision-making and meaningful communication. People had access to easy read and pictorial information and staff used a range of communication techniques, depending on people’s individual needs and preferences.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care. People told us staff listened to them and we observed staff listening to people choices when providing support. People’s relatives were encouraged to complete feedback questionnaires and told us they felt comfortable raising any concerns or making a complaint if necessary. Comments included, “We get questionnaires, and we are asked if we have any comments or problems” and “If there was a problem they’d answer immediately, and they’d deal with it quickly.”

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff understood people’s individual needs and made adjustments to support people to access services in line with their preferences. For example, planning appointments at people’s preferred times and ensuing appropriate staffing and transport arrangements were in place to minimise potential distress.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care and support in response to this. Staff had received specialised training to support them in understanding the barriers faced by autistic people and people with a learning disability and the provider demonstrated a clear commitment to mitigating these barriers. People had detailed health and communication plans in place to ensure their needs were understood and received support from a range of different health professionals to meet their needs and promote good health outcomes.

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 people and their relatives did not wish to discuss future end of life wishes, guidelines were in place about what to do in an emergency medical situation. The registered manager told us people and relatives could revisit this information at any time and make changes as and when required.