The Old Rectory

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 71 (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.

A manager assessed people’s needs before they were admitted to the service to ensure their needs could be safely met at The Old Rectory. This involved speaking to the person, their relatives and partner agencies. Care plans were implemented based on people’s needs. A relative told us, “I have been through my relative’s care plans, it took about 2 hours.”

Ongoing monitoring took place, and any changes in people’s needs were reported to relatives and other agencies when required. If the person’s needs could no longer be met by the provider, staff worked with external professionals to identify a more suitable placement.

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.

People’s dietary needs were assessed and met in line with evidence‑based guidance, with specialist diets implemented as recommended by healthcare professionals to promote safe and effective care. We saw people were offered choices of food on small plates so that they could visualise the choices. They were then able to point to their chosen meal. People we spoke with told us they enjoyed the food. One person said,” The food is good, I get what I like. I get a choice of 2 hot meals at lunch time.” Another person told us, “The food is excellent. We get what we like. I like the breakfasts. I have Weetabix every day and a cup of tea. I get drinks all day as many as I want.”

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.

A visiting health professional told us that staff communicated effectively when people’s needs changed and followed their healthcare advice. They told us as the staff team were consistent, they knew people well and were able to support them effectively when they visited.

Daily handovers and staff team meetings meant that staff had the information they needed to care for people effectively.

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 were supported to attend health care appointments and engage in activities to enhance their emotional wellbeing. One person told us, “It’s like a hotel here. I come and go as I please. I need someone to walk with me just in case I fall. I only walk around the garden.”

People were supported to eat a healthy diet. One person told us, “I like the food. It’s like home cooking. I like everything here. I get fresh fruit and vegetables.”

The provider did not always routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They did not always ensure that outcomes were positive and consistent, or that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

When people’s needs required extra monitoring, for example, when people were at risk of malnutrition, records were not always completed with enough detail. Records we saw did not state how much of the meal or drink a person had consumed. This could mean that a person may not have eaten or drank enough during the day to remain well or ensure there was no further weight loss.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The MCA requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the MCA. In care homes, and some hospitals, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The provider was working within the principles of MCA and had applied for assessments and renewals of DoLS when required.