BGS Healthcare Ltd

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

We reviewed 2 quality statements for this key question. People had a personalised support plan, which they helped devise and review. This enabled a person-centred service, based on individual wishes to be provided. There were systems to ensure staff were well supported. This included regular discussions and an effective out of hours on call system.

This service scored 80 (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 Kindness, compassion and dignity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

Staff told us they supported the same people, unless covering staff sickness or annual leave. This gave consistency and meant staff knew people well, with good relationships being built. Staff told us they encouraged people make choices and be as independent as they wanted to be. They said they promoted people’s rights to dignity and respect throughout their work. Leaders confirmed this and said people were very much involved in planning their support and its review.

People told us they were supported to be as independent as possible, make choices, and direct their care. They gave examples of staff stepping in to help where needed, rather than creating dependency. This included putting a topical cream on a person’s finger so they could rub it on their skin themselves. Staff enabled another person to decide what they wanted to eat through visual choices. People were very complimentary about the staff and said their rights to dignity and respect were fully promoted. They said staff also interacted well with family members, which increased the depth of relationships.

Each person had a comprehensive, person-centred care plan. The plan was developed with the person and/or their family and clearly demonstrated the person’s abilities and wishes for what they wanted to achieve. There were systems to keep the support plan under regular review. This encouraged people to have choice and control over their support. A scheduling system was used to ensure support was delivered at a time convenient to the person. This meant the person could then continue with their day’s events without intrusion.

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

There were systems to promote staff well-being. This included one-to-one and team meetings, training sessions and informal discussions. Staff who found on-line training difficult were able to go through the modules with a member of the office staff. This enabled effective learning through respecting the staff member’s learning style. There was an external company staff could use to gain wellbeing support if needed. This was anonymous and helped with areas such as stress and anxiety.

Leaders told us workforce wellbeing was important and they worked hard to promote this. This included having a fleet of cars and both manual and electric bicycles for staff to use, to help financially and minimise stress. Leaders told us they ensured staff worked to their strengths, to ensure wellbeing. This included one staff member only supporting a small team of people, as they did this well without added pressure. Staff told us they were very well supported and could talk to the manager or any of the office staff if they had any worries. They said the on-call service also worked well with efficient advice and guidance given.