Braceborough Hall Care Home

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

This means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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.

Staff at the service worked with people and their relatives to ensure care was personalised and that people's choices and needs were managed collaboratively. We received several positive examples from relatives about how well staff communicated with them to make sure people received the right support.

We saw evidence to show when one person's anxiety escalated, staff worked closely with their relatives and external health professionals to ensure the individual received care tailored to their needs. The person's care plan contained clear guidance for staff on how to provide support, and the staff we spoke with demonstrated a strong understanding of the techniques required to support the person appropriately.

These practices demonstrate that staff consistently deliver person-centred care and maintain effective communication with relatives and professionals.

Throughout our assessment, people, relatives, and health professionals told us staff knew individuals and their health needs well. One visiting health professional gave very positive feedback on how well staff responded to managing people's health needs. For example, they described a situation where a person required treatment from their GP and highlighted the importance of staff monitoring the person over a period of time. They told us staff had followed the GP's instructions closely and demonstrated a strong understanding of their role in ensuring the person was treated successfully.

This evidence shows that staff work effectively with health professionals and follow clinical guidance to support people’s health needs.

People at the service were provided with information in formats that supported their level of understanding. Easy-read signage was displayed throughout the service to assist individuals living with dementia. Care records contained clear guidance on how best to communicate with each person. Staff demonstrated awareness of individual needs; for example, one member of staff explained how they supported a person who was partially deaf and partially sighted by standing in front of them so they could see, speaking into the ear with better hearing, and providing written information in large, clear text when required.

The complaints procedure was clearly displayed within the service, and all relatives spoken with were aware of how to raise a complaint if needed. Relatives we spoke with reported they had not needed to use the formal complaints process because staff were responsive to any concerns or queries raised. One relative commented, “I have never had to use it. If we want to know something we talk to the staff, and they sort things out.” We reviewed one complaint that was being managed in line with the provider’s complaints policy, we saw the registered manager had followed the complaints procedure to address the concerns raised. Both people using the service and their relatives gave positive feedback about how staff involved them in decisions about care and listened to their views to ensure good outcomes. People and relatives felt listened to and involved in decision-making, which supported trust and satisfaction with the care provided.

The registered manager ensured that people could access the care, support, and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff responded promptly to changes in people’s needs and worked collaboratively to arrange timely interventions. For example: When a person’s mobility declined, staff quickly arranged for an assessment and appropriate equipment was made available to support the person’s independence.

A relative gave a further example, they told us that when their family member became unwell, staff contacted healthcare professionals immediately and kept them informed throughout.

People and their relatives told us that staff treated them fairly and ensured they had access to healthcare services when needed. Relatives reported that staff were proactive in arranging appointments and liaising with healthcare professionals. One relative commented, “I believe [Name] is treated fairly and as I have said they (staff) are quick to get them any help they need from other professionals like doctors and hospital appointments.” This demonstrated that the service promoted fairness and equality, and ensured timely access to healthcare, supporting positive outcomes for people using the service.

People received compassionate and dignified end-of-life care from staff who had the training and guidance needed to support them. People’s wishes were discussed with them and their families, and care plans clearly reflected individual preferences, such as who they wanted present, where they wished to die, and what personal items they wanted around them. The registered manager told us they were committed to ensuring the highest standard of care and worked closely with district nurses, Macmillan nurses, St Barnabas, and Marie Curie specialists.

They also described how the service supported relatives, enabling them to spend as much time as they wished with their loved one. For families who chose to stay, the service provided food, refreshments, and comfortable sleeping arrangements to make their time together as supportive and reassuring as possible.