Burrswood 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

People’s care and support needs were recorded in an electronic care plan and all staff had access to care records via electronic devices. Care plans and risk assessments were fully completed and identified people’s current needs. The records were regularly reviewed, and staff could accurately describe people’s support needs. Staff were not always recording care interventions in real time. We raised this with the management team who since provided staff with additional training. This did not impact upon the delivery of care. People were supported to communicate in their chosen format. The home employed some staff who were multi-lingual and were able to speak some people’s first language. Information could be presented in suitable formats such as large print and in easy read documents. The provider had identified the need to improve signage around the home and this was part of their improvement plan. Concerns and complaints were listened and responded to. Relatives in particular told us since the implementation of the new management team, they were less likely to officially complain as the registered manager had an open door and they were able to contact them anytime. People and staff were treated as individuals and their diversity was respected and protected. People were supported effectively when they were at the end of their life.

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.

People told us they were aware they had care plans in place, and they had been involved in planning their care upon moving into the care home. People were aware the care records were stored on an electronic care planning system and could be printed off for them to review if they preferred. People told us, staff were aware of their personal preferences. A relative told us, “They (staff) know [Name] inside and out.”

Staff had received training to use the electronic care planning system. Staff could describe people’s needs and told us the system identified when tasks were required such as repositioning.

Staff were inputting information into the electronic record such as nutritional and hydration intake, but we found this was not always recorded in real time. For example, staff were often recording people had received lunch and then dinner quite close together which was not the case. We observed one person throughout the morning and staff had recorded they had offered multiple drinks which the person had accepted but this was not our observations. People were receiving support with nutrition and hydration, but the information was not being recorded at the time. Following this the management team provided further training to staff.

People received health care support when they needed it. Relatives told us, "[Name] has a podiatrist, there is an optician that comes round, and a hairdresser.” and “[Name] has a GP here, the optician comes here, and a chiropodist.”

Staff told us, any concerns with people's health were reported promptly to senior staff who reported to health care professionals to ensure there was a continuity of care, support, and treatment. The management team were involved in regular reviews of peoples care, support and treatment and were able to capture areas for improvement through care record audits.

Partners were satisfied, the provider had become more responsive in continuing to ensure people received continuity of care, support and treatment.

People were supported to access healthcare services when needed. It was difficult to assess against the availability and provision of services as people referred to NHS services were often waiting against NHS waiting times. We did see people received a continuity of care from primary medical services such as the GP and district nurses.

People and relatives felt there had been improvements in communication across the home. They also felt involved and made aware of what was happening in the home. Relatives told us, "Yes, we get an email copy of what’s going on in the home and any changes." and “Yes, [Name] wasn’t well recently, and we discussed it with the home and the GP."

Staff were aware of the importance of people being able to access information in the most suitable format. Staff told us they could share information verbally or in large print. Staff told us, they slowed down the communication to people and spoke in shorter sentences. One staff member was able to speak the same dialect of a language to a person living at the home and this had assisted in reducing the persons agitation.

People’s communication needs were identified in their care plan. Where people had limited verbal communication, care plans gave information on how they did communicate through gestures etc. Information was shared in suitable formats. Large font was used and there were staff available across the home who could speak several different languages. Advocacy support was advertised in the monthly newsletters. Dementia signage was in use across the home and this was being improved upon. Policies underpinned the importance of ensuring information was available in the most suitable format for people.

Relatives and people spoken with felt they could make any complaints and would feel listened to, and any concerns would be resolved. In regard to making a complaint, people and relatives told us, "We would speak to the Unit manager or the manager who has an open-door policy." sand "Me personally I would speak to the unit manager or the regular care staff on the unit are open to have chat and let me know if there are any issues."

The registered manager told us, the management team had been able to spend a lot of time with people and really got to know them. Staff spoken with confirmed this and told us the registered manager's appointment had been key to reducing any anxieties from relatives as they were open and transparent. Staff welcomed feedback from people and their relatives to help improve the home.

There had been 3 complaints since the last inspection. All had been dealt with professionally and outcomes provided. A complaints policy was in place. Feedback had been obtained from people and the management team were in the process of obtaining feedback from staff. Not all the feedback from people had yet been collated but from the feedback forms review, most of the feedback was extremely positive. Residents’ meetings and family meetings were also in place to raise any questions or obtain feedback.

People had access to out of hours emergency services such as GP’s and crisis teams. People confirmed they had been supported to the emergency department when urgent care and attention was required.

Staff were aware of who they should contact and when during an emergency situation. Staff told us they always sought guidance from a senior staff member, a nurse or the management team. Senior staff were responsible for any post treatment support and ensured the appropriate arrangements were made following discharge from hospital.

Partners were satisfied, the staff were responsive in emergency and safeguarding situations.

There were clear instructions for staff to follow in the event of someone becoming unwell or distressed. For people who required support with managing their mental health, the staff were aware of the crisis support teams available and who they should contact. Care records recorded how people should be supported to ensure they gained access to health and social care services when required.

People and their relatives told us they were always given support when they needed it. Comments include, “If I needed extra support, they (staff) would help me.” and “Yes, when [Name] had falls but was not injured, they (staff) would call me. If it was serious, they would call for an ambulance. One of the staff came to the hospital to help me.”

Staff told us they treated people as individuals and there was a diverse staff team who were able to use their knowledge of other languages to support people whose first language was not English. Staff were aware of support networks and groups to support people who may have protected characteristics.

Peoples care was tailored to their needs and was continually reviewed to ensure needs were met and the most accurate information was available for staff to support people effectively.

End of Life care plans were in place. Any cultural needs were identified. If the person did not want to discuss their end-of-life care, it was recorded. One person’s health had deteriorated. The GP had had a discussion with them and their family about the support plans for the end of their life. The person was referred to the end-of-life team for additional support when the time came. People told us they had discussed end of life care planning with the staff and their families. Relatives told us they had been included in conversations with staff and together with their relation had made decisions on how they would want their end-of-life care to be.

Staff told us they were informed when people were at the end of their life. Staff were aware of the care plans for supporting people in line with their wishes at the end of their life and had received training on end-of-life care. Two staff members were scheduled to attend a six-month training in end-of-life care with a local hospice.

Care records documented people’s preferences and wishes for end-of-life care. Positive links had been formed with GP’s and district nurses to support the home when people are coming to the end of their life.