Brunel House

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 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 treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People and their representatives had been involved in planning the care they needed. Care records demonstrated staff took an individual approach to meeting people’s needs.

There was a ‘resident of the day’ process. This meant people’s care plans were reviewed at least monthly to make sure it was up to date and reflected people’s needs. The registered manager said, “We review 1 person from each floor every day. The nurse on days reviews people’s care needs and calls families. I do a monthly review with the person and with families if appropriate.”

We observed staff positively engaging with people. There was a calm atmosphere and people appeared happy, watching film clips on an electronic tablet, and laughing. Staff greeted people warmly and used their name when speaking to them. They treated everyone equally and as people who could make their own choices.

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 worked with other services, to ensure people received continuity of care. Examples included social workers and specialist nurses. Details of this support was recorded in people’s care records.

The registered manager shared examples of how nursing staff had acted quickly to support new admissions to the service for people in crisis. In some cases, referrals were received late on a Friday afternoon when fewer professionals were available to help. Nursing staff worked with a local hospice to gather important information about people’s needs and arranged safe admissions. This helped to ensure people received consistency with care from professionals who were familiar with people and their health needs.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. In the provider information return (PIR) the provider told us, ‘Brunel House is committed to meeting the Accessible Information Standard to ensure that all residents, particularly those with sensory impairments or communication needs, are supported to understand and be understood in a way that is meaningful to them. We recognise that effective communication is essential in delivering person-centred care and promoting independence, dignity and inclusion’.

We found information on people’s communication needs were recorded in their care plans and information was displayed around the service in an accessible way.

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.

People told us they would complain if they needed to. Complaints received were recorded and investigated by management at the service or the provider representatives. Outcomes from investigations were shared with complainants and there was signposting to organisations such as the Local Government Ombudsman. The registered manager told us they encouraged people to speak up when things were not to their satisfaction. They used all complaints as areas to learn and develop and were responsive in making changes to improve. For example, a recent complaint received was about a maintenance issue. The registered manager agreed action needed to be taken, so arranged for replacement fittings. This action was satisfactory to the complainant.

The registered manager told us they had started doing a ‘surgery day’ for people and families every week. This was an opportunity for people and their family members to visit and share concerns or ideas with the registered manager.

The provider completed regular surveys with people and relatives. The survey completed in 2025 showed a high level of satisfaction for the environment, care and lifestyle. An action plan had been produced and already action had been taken to address comments. For example, one comment was for cakes and/or fruits to be served regularly, this had been completed. Another action was for the service to recruit a maintenance person. This action was completed.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Assessments included the support people required to access the care they needed, including any specific equipment or adaptations. The assessments were regularly reviewed and updated as people’s needs changed.

People had been supported to personalise their rooms reflecting individual identities and interests. A number of rooms had sensory lights which helped control the lighting in people’s rooms. People told us they had support from staff to have their rooms according to their individual preferences. Accessibility of the building was considered as part of people’s needs assessments and on-going reviews. The service’s garden was accessible for everyone, including people using a wheelchair or walking frame. However, for some people to access the garden it required a walk around the building or access through 2 locked doors. Whilst this helped to keep the garden areas safe, this might limit the access for some people who were more independent than others.

Staff and leaders actively listened 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.

In the provider information return (PIR) the provider told us, ‘Brunel House has a clear and structured approach to problem-solving. When barriers or challenges arise, the Home Manager immediately calls an emergency meeting with the senior and clinical teams to discuss the issue in detail. During these meetings, the team works together to identify the root cause, assess the impact on the people living in the home, and develop a tailored action plan. These action plans are specific, measurable, and timebound, with clear responsibilities assigned to relevant team members. Once an action plan is agreed upon, it is shared and communicated effectively with the wider staff team to ensure everyone is informed and working consistently towards the same goals. The management team plays a key role in cascading this information clearly, using handovers, team meetings, and supervision sessions as opportunities to embed the actions into daily practice’.

The registered manager gave us examples of how they had identified people who may experience levels of discrimination due to their behaviour. Other people living at the service might not be understanding of people’s individual diagnosis. The registered manager told us, “I work hard to make sure people are included, everyone is joining in with everything going on at the service. I constantly remind staff and communicate with them to stress people must be included.”

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.

People had been supported to express their wishes about end-of-life care. Relatives and friends were involved in these discussions where appropriate. People's care plans contained details of their wishes.

The registered manager told us they aimed to develop this area of care. Good links had been made with the local hospice service and improving care delivery for people at the end of their lives was key for the management team at the service.