Burger Court

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

At our last inspection this key question was rated requires improvement. At this assessment, the provider had improved, and this key question is now rated good. Staff and leaders made sure people were supported to receive coordinated and appropriate care. Systems and processes were in place, but they did not always allow for a person-centred approach to people’s care. Not everyone we spoke to at the service felt involved in their care planning. However, people spoke positively of the way staff and the manager listened to and engaged them. People were supported to access education and recreational opportunities, in line with their preferences. People were supported to plan for the future, including moving on from the service to more independent living.

This service scored 64 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We received mixed feedback from people about how involved they felt in care planning. For example, some people told us they felt involved in planning and reviewing their care, whilst others did not. Comments from people included, “I feel I am involved in my care planning when it is necessary” and “I did have a copy of my care plan, but that was a while ago. I do not remember if was involved in the care planning.”

Systems and processes were in place, but they did not always allow for a person-centred approach to people’s care. For example, people had been invited by letter to book an appointment to view and edit their care plans, if they wished to do so. However, this did not reflect an understanding that care plans belonged to the individual. We raised our concerns with the manager, about the lack of person-centred and inclusive approach that was used to engage people in reviewing their care. The manager acknowledged our concerns and told us they were working with staff to promote a much more inclusive approach.

People had a keyworker and had monthly reviews with them. However, we found people’s care plans did not always fully reflect their physical, mental, emotional and social needs. For example, 1 person’s care records failed to consider or record their specific needs relating to their learning disability.

Most people told us they felt supported by staff to make sure they received the care they needed from both staff at the home and professionals involved in their wider care. However, 1 person told us they did not think their care plan was always followed.

Staff and leaders made sure people were supported to receive coordinated and appropriate care. Staff told us that health and social care professionals were involved in people’s care as necessary, and that any guidance or information provided was added to their records and care plans. Feedback from staff included, “We liaise with GPs, psychologists to review people’s care and support with them and those changes will be added to their care plan and risk assessment as well.” The manager also gave an example about how they had worked with a person’s family and their social worker to monitor and manage the person’s needs while away from the service.

No concerns or comments were raised by partners in relation to care provision, integration and continuity. A recent enhanced monitoring report from the local authority referred to staff supporting people and working with involved professionals to identify next steps for people preparing to move on from the service.

People’s care records showed the involvement of some health care professionals such as mental health nurses and doctors, social workers and GPs.

People and their relatives mostly felt informed about what was happening at the service. Comments included, “I get information about things that happen within the home either by a poster on the wall or being given to me verbally” and “Staff do inform us of any changes to be made in the service of the home is going to be run.” A relative told us they would like to see the return of monthly newsletters. “We have received newsletters in the past every month but cannot remember the last time we received one It would be nice to hear from the home when they will start sending them again it did give us notice of upcoming events which we did appreciate.”

The manager told us they were looking at ways of improving communication with people living at the service, in a way they would be more likely to be involved with. They were in the process of setting up a setting up a WhatsApp group for people living at the home to join if they wished, as a method of keeping them informed about what was happening in the home and sharing information people might find helpful. The manager felt people appreciated this kind of communication as this would also allow people to share their views.

We found information in relation to people’s medicines, some health conditions and maintaining a healthy lifestyle were available in an easy read format. At the time of our assessment, people using the service did not need information to be provided in alternative formats but the manager said this could be provided as needed.

Overall, people spoke positively about the way the manager and staff involved them in the service. Feedback included, “I enjoyed writing my care plan with [the manager]; she has taken time to meet with me regularly to complete it. I felt listened to.” However, further work was needed to make sure everyone living at the home felt fully involved in their care.

Staff told us there was a complaints process people could follow if they were dissatisfied with any aspect of their care. They told us people were encouraged to try and resolve things informally, where this was appropriate, but were comfortable to use the formal route. The manager told us about how they had worked with a person to listen to their views and try to support them in understanding an issue in the service that was causing them concern.

Improvements were needed to ensure people were involved in decision making about the service. The provider had already begun to identify ways of doing this and had a service improvement plan in place to support them. Complaints were well managed, and learning was taken from them to minimise the risk of the complaint being repeated. We found information about the complaints process was available in communal areas.

People we spoke with did not report facing any barriers to accessing services. For example, 1 person told us they were supported to access education courses externally and had discussed future goals and aspirations relating to education or employment opportunities. Another person told us how they were supported to attend activities and a well-being group organised by a mental health charity.

The manager and staff told us they supported people to access services. Where they felt people may be affected by possible discrimination or judgement, they sought services where this was less likely to happen. Staff said they would support people to access services as they wished.

We did not receive any negative feedback from partners in relation to people’s equity in access.

Assessments of people’s needs considered ways of supporting them to access services that were appropriate to them.

People were supported to overcome any difficulties they might encounter in making sure they experienced equality in care, lifestyle choices and in following their interests and preferred pastimes. We spoke with 1 person who told us they had been supported by staff to access education, with a view to securing paid employment in the future.

Staff told us of occasions when inappropriate comments had been made by people living in the service. They told us that it was addressed with the person and actions put in place to reduce recurrence. They told us discussions were held with people to review any impact. The importance of treating everyone with respect was also covered in residents’ meetings. The manager gave us examples about how people had been supported to enjoy new experiences. This included a person being supported to book and attend a professional sporting occasion and supporting a person to obtain information about a faith they were interested in following.

Processes were in place to ensure people were supported to experience equality in their care and preferred lifestyle choices. A key worker system was in place and people met with their key worker monthly, or more often if the person wished.

People were supported with planning for the future, including to move on from the service, where appropriate. People spoke positively of the support they received from staff with this. Comments included, “I would say staff support me with making goals for myself” and “I have been shown options of supported living and a member of staff has taken me to every assessment.”

The manager said they were introducing a more structured approach to supporting people to set goals for their futures. They also said they were supporting staff to prepare for discussing end of life planning with people.

There were systems in processes in place to ensure people were supported in planning for their future. For example, leaders worked with partners to make sure they collaborated effectively in supporting people to plan for their futures. However, care records lacked evidence of goal setting and planning for the future.