Badminton Place

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 assessment we rated this key question outstanding. At this assessment, the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

Staff delivered person centred care and records supported them to do this. Records overall were up to date and care plans reflected people’s needs and preferences. Staff knew people well and kept them at the heart of what they did. They worked with people, relatives and other professionals to meet individual’s diverse health and care needs. People were encouraged to participate in a wide range of activities. People were sensitively supported to make informed choices about their care and plan for their future care needs.

People and relatives were able to give feedback in different ways. Most told us they were confident that, if they complained, their concerns would be taken seriously, and the senior team would take action as necessary.

The management team monitored aspects of care delivery such as care records, medicines management and health and safety compliance as well as staff performance to ensure this was consistent and of a high standard.

This service scored 79 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Before carrying out this assessment, CQC received concerns about staff knowledge, skills and training about how they supported people who lived at the service. We saw staff delivering person-centred care and records were up to date and reflected people’s needs.

Person-centred care plans provided guidance to staff about how to safely support people and meet their needs. People or their relatives were involved in creating and reviewing care plans. They included details about people’s physical, mental, emotional and social needs, as well as their interests, hobbies and life histories. When we highlighted to the management team that some information was not sufficiently detailed, they acted immediately to change this.

Staff recorded information about people’s care and support on an electronic system. This enabled the management team to monitor all aspects of care delivery. An alert was raised on the electronic system if a person did not receive their medicines on time. Staff responses to people’s call bells were also monitored. This enabled the management team to check response times and monitor the timeliness of care delivery.

Staff understood the principles of person-centred care and explained how and why they kept individuals at the centre of everything they did. One staff member told us, “They’re like my family. We always treat the residents with respect and as individuals.”

People and their relatives were involved in making choices about their care. One person told us, “I have asked to only have female carers, and that’s what I get.” Staff knew people well and responded to changes in their needs or preferences. We saw staff offering choices and giving people time to respond. We observed a member of staff heating a person’s food because they liked it to be piping hot.

Staff and managers worked with other professionals to meet people’s diverse health and care needs. This helped ensure care was co-ordinated and supported individual choice. People and their relatives were involved in reviewing individual needs where relevant.

Professionals gave positive feedback about how the staff team delivered care which met people’s assessed needs. One professional said, “Staff have collaborated well by having multi-disciplinary meetings with individual people and family members to discuss progress and any ways we can support their quality of life.” Another professional confirmed that staff were responsive to changes in people’s needs and followed the guidance they were given about treatment.

Local church representatives visited the home regularly. People were observed attending a service in one of the lounges. One person said they would like more events which were organised by the church. This was shared with the management team.

People had access to information in ways they could understand. For example, posters and programmes of activities and clear menus. Relatives told us staff communicated with them about their family member’s health and wellbeing. One relative told us their family member had been admitted to hospital, and staff had called them twice a day to share updates. However, another relative felt they had not been kept up to date with changes concerning their family member. They had raised this with the manager.

We saw staff adapting their verbal and non-verbal communication to meet the needs of different people. Person-centred communication care plans helped staff understand how to meet individual abilities and needs. One staff member said, “We can read the care plans, and handovers are good because we find out every day if there are changes or anything we need to know.”

Information about people’s communication needs was identified, recorded, highlighted and shared as relevant.

People and relatives were able to give feedback or raise complaints in different ways. They spoke with managers or staff, regular surveys were undertaken, ‘resident’ and relative meetings took place, and formal complaints could be made. Recent survey results were being reviewed at the time of our assessment, but these indicated people were happy with the quality of care and the service overall. The service had an action plan to manage changes or improvements where necessary.

The management team took learning from feedback, complaints and concerns as an opportunity for improvement. We saw examples of how learning had been incorporated into daily practice and changes made.

Most people and relatives told us they were confident that if they complained, their concerns would be taken seriously, and leaders would take action as necessary. One relative told us they had put forward some practical suggestions and these had been implemented by the manager. However, in some cases, people felt action was not taken when they raised issues or concerns. One person told us, “They say ‘we’ll look into that’, and that’s the end of story. Nothing is done.”

Compliments about the service had been received from relatives and professionals. Several families shared their gratitude for the care their relatives received. One card read, “Thank you so much for all the care you gave both [Name] and myself, especially over these last weeks...I was very touched by the carers’ genuine affection for [Name].”

Staff took action to ensure people could access care or treatment when they needed it and worked without barriers or delays. For example, a physiotherapist, GP and complementary therapist came to Badminton Place every week. There were regular chiropodist visits, and a dentist was about to start providing a clinic at the service. People were also supported to attend specialist appointments at hospital or in the community. This meant their care and treatment was accessible, timely and in line with best practice. Staff told us, “It is all about the person getting what they need.”

One healthcare professional told us staff promptly contacted them if there were concerns about changes to people’s health or condition. This helped them take timely action to provide treatment when necessary.

People told us they were treated fairly and were encouraged to give their views and feedback about the service. The feedback we received from people and their relatives was largely positive.

There was a good awareness of equality and human rights legal requirements in the organisation. The service had policies and procedures to support equality and diversity. Staff were supported to understand these and to ensure people did not face barriers to care and treatment.

Staff recorded people's diverse needs, including their preferences and any specific requirements they had. One relative told us when their family member moved to the service, staff had bought their favourite snack food items and a magazine which reflected their interests. Another relative told us the chef spent time with their relative to find out if they had any cultural or religious dietary requirements as well as preferences.

The activities which people were encouraged to participate in reflected a wide range of interests and needs. This included cultural celebrations and events. For example, church services, Remembrance Day commemoration, memory café, gardening and pets as therapy visits. Staff told us they were able to adapt activities to meet people’s unique needs and people could be supported individually as well as in groups.

People were supported to make informed choices about their care and plan for their future care while they had the capacity to do so.

People and their relatives were supported to discuss their wishes regarding end-of-life care, and these were documented in their care records.

When people had expressed wishes about cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) or end of life care, these were respected and regularly reviewed. This helped staff to support people to remain in control and respect the decisions they had made about their life.

Some people returned home or moved to different settings where they were more independent. A training kitchen was available to enable people to maintain or develop their skills in activities of daily living.