Broadbridge Park

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

The overall rating for this key question is good. Staff knew people well which enabled them to monitor any changes to needs and escalate concerns to health and social care professionals. People were supported to overcome barriers to inequalities in health and social care. Referrals were made to ensure people had access to health services in a timely way. People’s protected characteristics and any communication needs were considered, staff understood and respected people’s needs and preferences. People were listened to and were involved in their care and the running of the service. Care reviews involved people and where appropriate, their relatives. Resident meetings were held so people were kept informed and to give their opinions.

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.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

People’s equality and human rights were protected, people were supported by staff who helped them overcome barriers to care and receive good outcomes. Relatives commented on staff responsiveness to approaching health and social care professionals when needed. One relative said, “They will get professional help in when needed. Mum has some skin issues and they get the District Nurse in to help. They are really on the ball with that.” People told us staff made arrangements for health care input and monitored the effectiveness. One person commented, “I feel very safe here. They're arranging for more physio tomorrow. The doctor prescribed a cream which I was allergic to, they changed it really quickly. Now it's working much better the staff called the GP quickly, they (the GP) visit here on Thursdays.”

Following some concerns that had been raised about staff not always recognising health deterioration, staff had received some additional training and support. A member of the management team spoke about a piece of equipment they were now using to support clinical observations. They told us how staff were supported by visiting health professionals to understand the equipment and the benefits to people, especially those that may not communicate their needs. A staff member described how they ensured people were able to access health and medical appointments and how they monitored the effectiveness of treatment. They said, “[Person] had a blister on their heel, I reported this, it didn't get any worse, we changed their shoes to soft slippers. The district nurse came and said to put blue boots on (pressure relieving boots), but it was making it worse, we took the boots away and the skin is looking better and calmer. We said it was not right and we went back to the nurses.”

Staff followed the provider’s equality and human rights policy which clearly detailed how people should be treated in line with any protected characteristic. The provider’s policy also guided staff to ensure Accessible Information Standards (AIS) were met. Staff demonstrated their understanding of the policy in practice, for example, staff advised us to write down words for a person who found it difficult to hear. This was effective for the person and ensured they were included. Consideration to people’s preferences were made, for example, people were asked if they had a preference of the gender of staff members supporting them, and this was adhered to.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.