Bramcote Hills 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

We looked at evidence that the service met people’s needs. At our last assessment we rated this key question required improvements. At this assessment, the rating has changed too good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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 found there was social activities for people to be involved in to ensure people were stimulated. However, we were not assured this was always person centred and how the provider ensured peoples likes, preferences and choices were considered when planning activities. People told us they were not involved in the decision-making process.

The management team told us people were provided with an opportunity to be involved in their care plan, however people had declined. However, this was not demonstrated within peoples care plans and people told us they were not asked to read or take part in their care planning and reviews.

We did not observe person centred care. Care tasks were time specific; for example, everyone was supported to the dinning table for lunch and not asked. However, we saw staff had good knowledge of people’s dietary requirements.

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.

People told us they were not provided with opportunities to be involved in, or to provide feedback and be listened too. People also did not know who they could talk to if needed. One person told us, “I wouldn't know who to speak to here, I'd tell me nephew.” Care plans and risk assessment remained not co-produced which meant people were not provided with the opportunity to be involved in their care decisions or be listen to on how they wanted to be supported.

Staff and management could not explain or demonstrate how people’s feedback was obtained and how people were involved with their care and support.

There was a complaints process. The management team told us they had not received any complaints since our last visit. However, people had not been made aware of the process and how to raise a complaint if needed. People, staff and relatives were not asked for their feedback regarding the service.

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.

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

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.