London Care (Bristol Court)

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 service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

The last rating for this key question was requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good.

This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

At our last assessment, we identified breaches of the legal regulation relating to dignity and respect. At this assessment, we found improvements had been made. The provider was no longer breaching this regulation.

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.

At our last assessment, we found people were not always treated with dignity or respect. At this assessment, we found improvements had been made.

People told us staff treated them well and they had good relationships. Their comments included, “Staff are polite and respectful. They always talk with me”, “The carers are nice and do a good job” and “Staff have got to know me, and they are all really lovely. I am very happy with my care.”

People were able to make choices about the gender of their care workers. They were matched with staff who had the skills to meet their needs. Staff spoke a range of different languages. This meant the provider was usually able to allocate staff who could communicate with people in their first language if needed.

We observed staff supporting people in a kind and caring way. They addressed people well, using preferred names and pronouns. Staff took time to listen to people and make sure their choices were understood and respected.

People treated each other respectfully. We observed groups of people supporting each other and helping when needed. For example, helping to open difficult packages and sharing communal social activities.

Staff treated people as individuals. People explained staff knew them well and were able to meet their needs. People told us their cultural and religious needs were met. They were supported to celebrate special events. Comments from people included, “Staff know me well. They know when to interact with me and when to leave me alone. They are fantastic” and “The carers are familiar with me and good at helping me when I need.”

Some people had sensory impairments. A person explained how staff understood these and provided person-centred support to ensure they were given choices and felt safe.

Staff supported people to be independent when they were able. People were encouraged to do things for themselves. Some people’s planned care included learning or developing household skills. People told us staff were good at supporting with this.

The provider had a planned programme of social activities. They encouraged people living at the service to lead these. We spoke with people who ran different group activities. They told us they had the support they needed to organise these. Staff arranged other activities and encouraged people to participate. People were given information about social events and activities in advance to help them make decisions about these.

People told us they were able to make choices and these were respected.

Comments from people included, “Without a doubt, I have enough choice”, “I am supported to be independent. I go out on my own” and “[Person] is given choices. Staff respect these.”

Staff responded to people’s immediate needs. Staff monitored people’s wellbeing and alerted others if they had concerns about a person’s health. People confirmed this. A person explained, “Staff make sure I see a doctor if needed. When I had a fall, they contacted the doctor to check me over.”

The provider had introduced several initiatives designed to promote staff wellbeing. These included training staff for career progression and enabling internal promotions. Staff representatives throughout the organisation worked with senior managers to develop systems based on feedback from all staff. Recent changes had included updating the staff uniforms and changing job titles based on requests from staff.

Staff told us they were supported and had opportunities to meet with managers to discuss their work and wellbeing. Staff representatives had helped leaders to redesign the way supervisions and appraisals were conducted. These now included more focus on staff wellbeing.

Staff told us managers listened to their feedback and made changes based on this.