Bourley Grange

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

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

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

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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People and their relatives told us that staff treated them with dignity and respect. One relative told us, “The carers are friendly and kind… they are very respectful of [person’s] dignity and privacy.” One person said, “The carers are really excellent, couldn't be more compassionate, kind and considerate.”

People’s care plans clearly stated people’s abilities and where independence should be encouraged and supported. One relative said, “They do encourage her to drink and do things she can do on her own independently.” Staff knew when people needed their space and privacy and respected this. For some people this was very important. One staff member said, “We always knock before going into their rooms”. Staff were seen to sit with people at their level and assist people at their pace during mealtimes.

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People were supported to share their views and make their own decisions about care. One staff member said, “It’s all about the residents. We just want to do our best for them to make them happy.” The registered manager conducted relative’s meetings every 2 months to keep relatives informed and ask for feedback about care. One relative said, “At relative’s meetings there is a two-way stream of ideas and information.” Another relative told us, “The manager’s door is always open. I feel I can go to her about anything.” People were unsure if they had been involved in care planning. However, relatives told us they had been asked about people’s needs. Evidence of involvement of relatives and people were found throughout the care plans. One relative said, “There is constant dialogue about what is needed”.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People’s care plans clearly outlined their abilities and highlighted where independence should be encouraged and supported. Staff demonstrated awareness of when people needed space and privacy and respected this. Care plans included reminding staff to support people with being as independent as possible. People confirmed staff encouraged them to be independent. People said, “They say, do you want to wash here by yourself?”, “When I get out of bed, they watch me and give me encouragement.” People's care plans included information on how people would like to receive personal care including their likes and dislikes.

The provider evidenced how they listened to people and their wishes in relation to day trips and activities. For example,during a residents' meeting, people mentioned they struggleat times with the use of their mobile device. The staff listened to this and initiated a weekly session with the activity team where people have time to talk about the technical issues so they can continue their contact with their loved ones independently.

Staff also promoted people to regain their independence. One person arrived at the service chair bound and required the use of a hoist to be mobilised. Staff and the activity team promoted the person to undertake as many personal care activities and introduced a static bike to their regular routine and they have now been able to walk again. The person is now able to walk to the shops and regularly takes trips to the library to support other residents in borrowing books.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

People told us that staff responded promptly when they needed assistance, and our observations supported this. People had minimal waiting time to be supported by staff. This was observed during the inspection and through call bell audits. Staff were aware of people’s preferred routine and adhered to this as much as possible. For example, one person liked to sit in the living room in the morning and lunch but then preferred to be in their bedroom for the afternoon. After lunch, a member of staff asked the person if they would like to return to their room, which they said they would.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

The management team were welcoming and demonstrated an open and transparent approach throughout the inspection. Records of team meetings showed that staff had regular opportunities to raise concerns and share ideas. Staff told us they felt listened to and valued by the management team, and there were clear mechanisms in place for providing feedback. The management team operated an open-door policy, encouraging open communication and actively seeking input from staff.

Staff spoke positively about teamwork, morale, and communication within the service. They described a supportive environment where colleagues and managers worked collaboratively to resolve issues and maintain high standards of care.