St Georges Lodge Residential 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 and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last inspection, we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were 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 was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Before people came to live at the home, their care and support needs were discussed with them and their families. People’s preferences and choices were acknowledged and catered for, then documented in their care plans. For example, 1 person’s faith meant they were very active in their local church, so staff were respectful of their views and supported them as needed.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care 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 were unsure whether they had been involved in planning their care, but relatives confirmed they had been consulted.

Various assessment tools such as Waterlow and the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) were used to monitor people’s health and wellbeing. Waterlow assesses the risk of people developing pressure ulcers, whilst MUST assesses the risk of malnutrition. The manager told us that people consented to be weighed monthly, and for 1 person with heart failure, it was important they did not gain weight excessively.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people.

Various health and social care professionals liaised with staff at the home to provide advice and guidance about people’s care and support needs. District nurses visited regularly to administer insulin injections to people living with diabetes. Speech and language therapists provided advice and recommendations about people’s diets, for example, if they were at risk of choking or had swallowing difficulties. A healthcare professional told us, “The home works well in partnership with NHS services. Information is shared appropriately, which helps avoid duplication and ensures that residents’ needs are consistently met.”

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 confirmed they had access to healthcare professionals. One person said, “The doctors come here. They called the doctor because of a recent health problem, and they took me to see a specialist.” Another person told us, “Yes, they look after me. I had a bad leg and saw the doctor.” People’s oral health was assessed, and they had access to dental services if needed. People were supported by staff from a local medical practice who visited regularly and maintained phone contact.

Where people required a modified diet, following assessment by a speech and language therapist, the kitchen staff catered for this. Any food intolerances or allergies were recorded, and the chef demonstrated their understanding of people’s dietary needs. One person said, “I’m vegetarian and they can cope with that. There’s plenty of vegetables and cheese and eggs. I eat like I did at home.”

The provider did not always routinely monitor people’s care and support to ensure consistency or to make improvements.

Although people’s risks had been identified and assessed, care plans did not always provide staff with sufficient information to improve outcomes. For example, risks in relation to people on blood thinning medications who were also at risk of falls. Observations of staff moving and handling techniques and failure to apply the brakes on wheelchairs.

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

A relative said, “I have to make all the decisions. [Named person] can make the smaller decisions. I have to make decisions on her end of life, how I want her to be treated. I need to go away and think about it.” Another relative told us, “[Named person] is the main point of care. She’s always consulted.”

Staff completed training on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). A staff member said, “We act on the basis of people’s mental capacity. Even if a person has dementia, we have to respect their choice. Giving people different choices, like offering them what they like. I will try and give people the best.” Some people were deprived of their liberty under Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and applications had been sent to the local authority.