Yew Tree Cottage Residential Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

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.

The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Staff assessed people’s needs before they moved in so they could understand people’s preferences and routines and plan support accordingly. One person said, “I came to visit before I moved here. They gave me a choice of rooms, and they had made it all nice for when I arrived.”

People told us staff understood them and supported them in line with their needs. Care plans were personalised and reviewed regularly, which helped staff to care for people in a consistent way.

Records reviewed included risk and health assessments, which were regularly reviewed. For example, 1 person’s care records included falls and nutrition assessments with review dates recorded and evidence of ongoing monitoring.

The provider delivered care and treatment in line with current guidance and made sure it met people’s needs. People received support that reflected their assessed risks and health needs, and staff adapted support when people required help.

We saw evidence of monitoring linked to risks, including weight recording and action taken to understand why any changes had occurred. People described prompt healthcare support when this was needed. One person said, “They [staff] would get a doctor to see me. They [staff] help to make appointments,” and another told us, “If I need a doctor they come. [The registered manager] sorts it out and comes to the surgery with me."

The provider worked well with other professionals, so people received joined-up care. Staff worked closely with health and social care professionals to make sure people’s needs were met and to support continuity of care.

People described staff arranging and supporting attendance at appointments. Staff also described effective internal communication, including handovers, which helped maintain consistent support.

Teamwork and morale within the staff team were very positive. Staff told us they felt valued and well supported, and they recommended the service as a good place to work. One staff member said, “I just love working here.” This helped people experience stable relationships with staff who knew them well.

The provider supported people to maintain their health and access services that promoted wellbeing. People told us staff supported them to see healthcare professionals when needed and helped them to attend appointments.

People said staff helped them to go out, keep active and maintain interests where possible. People enjoyed spending time walking in the gardens. One person told us, “They make every effort to take you out. I went out the other week [with staff] and had a wonderful time.”

People were offered drinks regularly. People chose what they wanted to eat, and meals were presented in an appealing way. People described access to routine services such as chiropody and hairdressing. One person said, “The chiropodist comes here and the hairdresser comes.” Another said, “We have the chiropodist here”, and described being supported to maintain personal routines, including continuing to visit their preferred hairdresser in town. They told us, “I go to town for my hair. It’s the same hairdresser I used when I was at home."

The provider monitored people’s outcomes and used reviews to maintain and improve people’s quality of life. Care plans were reviewed regularly, which helped staff identify any changes in care needs and respond appropriately. Records reviewed showed ongoing monitoring of known risks and health reviews, including GP reviews when appropriate.

People spoke positively about the impact of their care. One person was being supported to improve their mental health and told us they had “Seen people [professionals] about it. [The registered manager] arranged it. I am waiting for [the appropriate therapy].” They described responsive staff support which reduced their anxiety and helped them feel secure. They told us, “I feel settled here. I think you know when somewhere is right. I feel safe here. There’s always someone [staff] around, even at night. They [staff] are at the end of this button [on their call bell]. They [staff] come immediately.” People also described being supported to do what mattered to them day to day. One person told us they were, “Wonderfully cared for. You can choose what you do,” which showed staff promoted choice in routines and activities.

The provider respected people’s rights and made sure staff sought consent before delivering care and treatment. Staff consistently treated people with respect, and people told us staff sought permission and supported choice in everyday decisions.

People had control over their day-to-day lives. People said staff respected their decisions and choices. One person had signed their care plan to consent to the support provided by staff. We saw consent, privacy and dignity were respected and staff sought consent before providing care.

The provider had processes that ensured the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) was followed effectively, to support people who lacked capacity to make specific decisions about their care. Staff ensured people were involved in decisions about their care, so their human and legal rights were upheld. Staff demonstrated an understanding of the MCA, and people who could make their own decisions were supported to do so, including routine choices about meals, activities and personal care.

People’s relatives felt involved and were able to support decision making when required. Where people lacked capacity for more complex decisions, relatives and those with Power of Attorney were involved appropriately. This supported an open approach where people’s views were listened to and acted on.