James Burns 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 service met people’s needs.At our last inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection 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 service 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 told us they received care which was person centred. Relatives said their loved one’s needs and preferences were considered by staff. Staff told us they had enough information about people’s needs to provide safe and continuous care and offer choice and control. Staff knew people and their needs well. We observed choice and control being offered to people and person- centred care being delivered. People appeared relaxed and comfortable in the presence of staff. Care was delivered according to people’s care plans and preferences. We observed positive interactions between people and staff, and people appeared relaxed and comfortable at James Burns House. People were supported and encouraged to maintain important relationships with family. Relatives said staff were friendly and welcoming to them and encouraged participation in people’s lives.

The service 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 told us they could access the care and support they required. This included seeing their doctor. Relatives said they were confident staff would contact additional medical support if needed. Records showed input from a variety of health and social care professionals. Staff and managers told us how important it was to work with external professionals to ensure care was holistic. Staff said they felt supported by the professional’s advice and guidance. Professionals said that staff and management raised concerns where required regarding people’s health needs.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Information about how people communicated was detailed in their care plans and risk assessments. Staff adapted to meet people’s individual communication needs. Staff told us they knew how to communicate well with people and adapted to meet people’s individual communication needs. The provider met the requirements of the accessible information standard (AIS) by ensuring sensory needs were known to staff. Since 2016 onwards all organisations that provide publicly funded adult social care are legally required to follow the AIS. The standard was introduced to make sure people are given information in a way they can understand. The standard applies to all people with a disability, impairment or sensory loss.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. People told us they felt involved in the running of the service, and relatives confirmed this. People and relatives told us they felt comfortable speaking with the manager or any of the staff if they had a concern or feedback. A person said, “Staff and managers are good, I speak to them, and they will sort out any concerns straight away.” A relative confirmed this and said “Concerns are listened to. I know who to go to and they will deal with it.” There was a complaints policy, and records showed complaints had been handled in accordance with the policy.Relatives told us staff made them feel comfortable to share any concerns, feedback or information as necessary. The service had systems in place to ensure people could feedback on the care they received through various channels, such as, monthly resident meetings, 6 monthly residents surveys, family surveys and reviews. Records of the monthly resident meetings showed people were informed of the progress of the actions.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.People told us they received care and support, which was accessible and considered their individual needs. Staff received training in equality and diversity and told us they supported people to live their lives how they chose.Policies and procedures underpinned all working practices within the service, and this was supported by training and ongoing monitoring and review.Records showed people were supported to see health and social care professionals when they needed to.

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.People and their relatives were confident they were treated fairly, and their rights were fully respected. Staff told us they had access to various ways of raising concerns about treatment which discriminates. We observed staff treating people as individuals and people experienced equity in outcomes. One staff member said, “I am really invested with residents.” The provider had a diversity policy in place.

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 and their relatives told us they felt at home living at James Burn House and were happy. People felt they could just concentrate on living their lives. The service provided people with the opportunity to plan for the future. People’s care plans contained information about their wishes and what mattered to them. These were completed with the person and relatives when appropriate their loved ones. Goals and outcomes and what someone wanted to achieve were clear in care plans. The service provided people with the opportunity to plan for the future. Records confirmed reviews were undertaken regularly and in accordance with the providers policy.