Bellsgrove Care 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 Requires Improvement. We also identified a breach of Regulation 15 (Premises and equipment). At this assessment the rating has changed to Good and the service was no longer in breach of Regulation 15.

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. Preassessments were completed before people moved into the service. This was to ensure their needs could be met. The registered manager told us, “I would complete a preassessment. I visited [Person] in hospital and did their assessment there or will do it in their own home.”

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. For example, guidance from healthcare professionals such as district nurses and speech and language therapists (SALT) were followed to deliver appropriate care to people. We observed people who required modified texture diets, such as pureed foods, received this in line with SALT recommendations. The registered manager told us, “They give us advice which we follow. I’ve just made two new referrals as things seemed to have changed a bit so it’s best to check.”

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. Staff completed detailed handover documents between shifts. These documents included information on how each person had been during the day or night, and any important information that required sharing such as if a person had been unwell. We observed staffing levels had been increased on the day of our onsite assessment to allow a person to be supported to a hospital appointment with a member of staff.

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. One person told us, “If I need the doctor they call them for me.” We observed that appropriate referrals to healthcare professionals were made when required, such as physiotherapists.

Although we identified an instance where staff had not appropriately recorded when a person had been supported to reposition, outcomes for people were positive. For example, the person’s skin integrity had improved, which meant they would be at less risk of infection and experienced less pain from this. Furthermore, one person who had previously required insulin to manage their diabetes was now supported by staff to control their blood sugar levels appropriately through their diet.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. We observed correct documentation was in place to aid this such as Do Not Attempt Resuscitation (DNAR) records where a person had made this decision.

Staff were aware of their responsibility to gain consent from people in regard to their care and treatment. A staff member told us, “We ask for their consent for everything.”