Bourley Grange

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

Care plans were written from people’s perspectives and contained information for staff about how people wanted activities to be carried out such as personal care. Care plans included specific information which captured people's needs, interests, positive personality traits and life histories. Care plans also included people likes and dislikes regarding, food and drink and how personal care is provided

Staff had clear guidance on how people wished to be supported, including their preferred routines. People told us they were happy living at the service, and staff were kind and treat them well. Staff told us how they supported people to make choices. This included choice of meals, how they liked to spend their time and when they wished to receive personal care.

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 demonstrated strong community engagement and partnership working. They had established positive relationships with local organisations, including local churches that people could attend if they wished. Regular activities within the local community also took place including regular visits to local clubs and garden centres. The day trips were discussed with people before they were arranged to ensure they were meaningful trips that provided them with fulfilment.

The provider had systems in place to monitor and review people’s care needs and to escalate concerns to external services. The service worked closely with the local authority and other agencies to continuously improve the quality of care they deliver. Referrals to external services included detailed information about people’s presenting risks, and outcomes and recommendations from professionals were recorded within the handover and people’s care plans to ensure they received the required care.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Staff confirmed they had access to all relevant information required to deliver safe, effective, and personalised care. Care plans included detailed guidance on each person’s preferred communication methods, covering both verbal and non-verbal approaches. This ensured staff could engage with people in a way that respected their individual needs and promoted inclusion.

There was regular communication between the registered manager and local services such as the local authority and GP surgery to ensure people received the right care that they required.

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.

The registered manager had an open-door policy, enabling people, relatives, staff, and visiting professionals to approach them with any concerns or suggestions. This was confirmed by both staff and people using the service, who told us they knew who the registered manager was and felt comfortable raising issues directly with them.

The registered manager had introduced a complaints tracker to monitor and learn from complaints made regarding the service. There was a clear complaints policy in place, and the registered manager explained how complaints were acted upon. People and their relatives told us they were aware of how to raise a complaint. One person said, “I would discuss it with the manager or clinical lead. I would have no hesitation in going to any of the senior people, they are very open.”

Regular ‘resident and relative’ meetings were held to allow people to share their views about the service including what they liked and what they feel could be improved. The service also regularly sought feedback from people, relatives, and staff through surveys which were reviewed and analysed. Responses were overwhelmingly positive. The registered manager confirmed that any concerns raised were addressed promptly and effectively.

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

Where necessary, the provider had access to a telephone translation service to support people with decision making regarding their care to support them to make an informed decision. Additionally, the registered manager highlighted that some staff were multilingual, enabling them to communicate effectively with people whose first language was not English and ensure they remained informed about their daily routines and choices.

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.

Staff supported people to have personalised activities on 1:1 basis regularly, either in their rooms or in communal areas as well as facilitate group sessions. People’s support was personalised; staff knew individuals needs well and protected people’s rights and removed barriers where they were able to. Staff told us people received the same quality of care at the service because people were given equity of opportunity and encouragement to participate in support and activities each day.

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’s care plans included information regarding their end of life care wishes which had been discussed with them and relevant others including relatives and professionals. People's end of life wishes were detailed in their care plans if they had wished to discuss this.