Brandon House

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

People provided mixed feedback about how staff treated them. Some people found staff to be caring whilst others said they were not always focused on their job. We observed staff treating people with kindness and respected people’s privacy and dignity. People told us staff treated them as individuals and made sure their care, support, treatment needs and preferences were met. However, we found people’s records lacked information to support people with their preferences for religion and culture. The management told us they put people's dignity and independence at the centre of the care provided. Staff also informed us they put peoples, choice, dignity and independence at the centre of everything they do. People told us not all staff understood their needs, views and wishes. During our observations we found call bells were not always accessible to people and staff were not responding to people immediately due to people not been able to call for assistance. Management told us they care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff and supported staff to always deliver person centred care. However, staff told us the atmosphere was not always nice.

This service scored 50 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People provided mixed feedback on how staff treated them. People told us, “Some are alright [staff], some are off hand, and they don’t know you or what you need” and, “I think they do care, but some staff are more interested about talking about their holidays or their ailments. They could be more focused on their job” and, “Most of the staff are nice to us, but there are some agency staff who can be awkward if I ask for a glass of water, they say someone else is getting it. They do sometime bring it after some time” and, “Yes they are caring.”

Management told us resident and relative meetings were held to gather feedback, so people felt listened to. They also had flash meetings with staff to discuss any changes required for people’s care.

No concerns or comments were raised by partners from attending a recent monitoring visit at Brandon House.

While on site we observed staff treating people with kindness and care and made sure their privacy and dignity needs were met.

People told us staff treated them as individuals and made sure their care, support, treatment needs and preferences were met. People commented, “Yes, they know I like to watch the cricket. They don’t disturb me; they just pop their heads around and check I am alright. That’s really good, I am happy here” and, “They know I like to be quiet and listen to my music and they respect this.”

Management told us people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics were at the centre of the care provided. However, we found people’s records lacked information to support people with their preferences for religion and culture.

During our assessment we did not always see people being treated as individuals. For example, one person had made a preference for care from only male staff however, there were no male staff working on the day we visited.

Care plans and risk assessments lacked details on how people preferred to be supported. For example, one person had a particular faith however, there was no detail in the person’s care plan as to how staff should support them with their religious beliefs.

People told us staff promoted their independence. Comments included, “I like to do things myself; I get dressed and make the bed”, “I do everything for myself. I am very independent” and, “I am independent. I get up have a wash and get myself dressed.”

The management and staff told us they put people's dignity, choice and independence at the centre of the care provided. Staff also informed us they put peoples, choice, dignity and independence at the centre of everything they do.

People were generally supported in their choice and independence needs, however during lunch time observations we found one person had restrictions imposed regarding their choice of food, this was not an assessed risk therefore they should have had their choice of meal. Staff were not aware the person was able to eat a normal diet and therefore only offered a soft diet meal.

People were not always supported to have choice and control over their lives and to maintain their independence. People and their relatives were not always involved in making decisions about their care and daily lives. Person-centered life stories had been completed for most people, however these lacked detail and contained basic in information.

People told us not all staff understood their needs, views and wishes. For example, people said, “There are a lot of different staff, and some don’t even speak to you, it’s not nice. A lot of staff don’t always know what to do” and, “I have to have a machine on for four hours every night. Last night I didn’t have a good night sleep. A trainee nurse came but she couldn’t do it, she went and got another nurse, and they sorted it out.”

The management told us they put people's needs, views and wishes first and responded to changes. However, staff told us management were not always quick at responding to concerns that staff had raised in relation to people requiring visits from health care professionals.

During our observations we found call bells were not always accessible to people and staff were not responding to people immediately due to people not been able to call for assistance.

Management told us they care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff and supported staff to always deliver person centred care. Staff told us the atmosphere was not always nice. Staff said, at the moment they did not find the management team approachable. Comments included, “I feel really down, and I feel I are been very negative but I’m not a machine” and, “We are simply overrun with work, not even being able to sit for 5 minutes bar our break times. Our work is not appreciated, and then challenged about stuff that isn’t done and we explain the reasons behind it doesn’t seem to matter, it should just be done”.

The service had a development and appraisal policy and a supervision policy. Supervisions and appraisals were not always completed in a timely manner. Not all staff were in date with their mandatory training and nurses’ medication competency checks were overdue. During our assessment staff told us that recently supervisions were not as frequent as it had been and not always meaningful. One staff member said, “At one point, it seems to have fallen under a lot recently.”