Aurem Care (The Red House)

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.

People’s needs were assessed together with people and their relatives before they moved into the service. Care plans were developed from these discussions and detailed people’s needs, with guidance for staff on how to meet these. Reviews took place regularly to ensure that care was still in line with their needs and wishes. People and relatives told us that they felt involved in developing the care plans. A relative fed back, ‘[Family member] receives a full health check regularly.”

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

A relative fed back, “From caring to nursing, the practices in place were well thought out, appropriate, always tailored to my [family member’s] changing needs and at all times supported by best practice guidelines.”

The service delivered care and treatment in line with current guidance, including appropriate dietary support, pressure area care monitoring and use of recognised assessment tools. Staff demonstrated knowledge of people’s needs and worked closely with external partners such as GPs and district nurses to review medicines and treatment plans.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

People benefited from robust systems and processes where information was shared by everyone involved in their care, with key partner agencies working collaboratively to achieve effective care for people. One external professional told us, “Communication with me has always been clear and appropriate and I have never needed to worry about what was happening when I was not present.” A member of staff told us, “We have the community TVN [Tissue Viability Nurse] who we can always call on. We can send a referral, and they’ll be with us the next day. They are really good.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

People and relatives said told us staff ensured the person had appropriate access to health care. One person told us, “I see the doctor and I’ve had my eyes tested.” A relative fed back, “[Family member] sees the doctor if there’s anything wrong with her”.

Leaders monitored people's health and liaised with relevant health care professionals to ensure people received the care and treatment they required. Staff recorded information about any health issues, action taken and the outcome of people's contact with health care professionals. People’s care plans explained the support people required to enable them to stay well and access healthcare services, where necessary.

People and relatives were very complimentary of the meals provided. Comments included, “The cook is lovely, she cooks a good meal and if you don’t like it, she does an alternative” “The food is excellent here”, “If there’s something on the menu that [chef] knows I wouldn’t like, she always offers something else” and “The food is fantastic and he has put on weight.”

Where needed staff supported people with their food and drink preparation, people told us that staff always made sure they had food and drink available to them. An external professional fed back, “[Chef’s] food always looks appealing even for those residents who require modified diets. [Chef] is knowledgeable and proactive regarding [modified food] I levels to ensure residents are safe and comfortable as possible.”

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They did ensure that outcomes were positive and consistent, or that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

Staff and leaders monitored people’s health needs through regular discussions, observations, repositioning schedules, wound care records and regular reviews. They acted on changes promptly, contacting external professionals when needed, and relatives told us they felt fully involved, with one saying, “There is a clear and efficient process for identifying residents who need review, and the SBAR forms [structured communication templates used in healthcare to ensure concise, accurate information transfer between professionals] are always prepared in advance of my arrival. These summaries are thorough and helpful, outlining key concerns, suggesting potential diagnoses, and including up-to-date observations, which allows for focused and effective clinical decision-making.”

Staff demonstrated understanding of how to identify early signs of deterioration, such as infections or skin changes. A relative told us, “The nurses provide an oversight and engage with my father thoroughly and when he has experienced health difficulties, they have been proactive and sought prompt additional medical attention.”

The provider ensured people were aware of their rights around consent and respect their rights when delivering care and treatment.

A relative fed back, “I visited often and was also always informed and consulted.”

Staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and sought people’s consent before providing care, as observed during medication and mealtime support. People and relatives told us staff always explained what they were doing. Staff could describe who had capacity to make decisions and how they involved relatives in best-interests discussions when required. Care records showed capacity assessments were completed and reviewed.