Northbrooke 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. Consideration was given to the level of care and support a person required prior to their moving into Northbrooke House. Assessments were completed by the manager whilst visiting the person in their home, hospital or other pre admission placement. This information was used to ensure any required equipment was available.

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. Care plans and related records showed consideration and reflection of current legislation and best practice guidance. Nationally recognised assessment tools were in use such as, for skin integrity and risk of malnutrition. An external health professional said, “There is a wide range of activities provided both in and outside the home. The activity leader appears to be very passionate about her job and has an inclusive approach.” A family member told us about the food provided and said, “He (relative) enjoys the meals here, the food is very good, I’ve seen them, and he has a good appetite.”

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. Care staff said they received a handover at the start of each shift which provided them with all necessary information. Staff described a positive team working environment. The management team understood how to seek support from health and social care staff when required. External professionals were positive about the service and felt able to make suggestions to the manager and that these would be followed. An external professional told us, “The staff team appear to be welcoming and want to work in partnership with families and professionals for the benefit of the residents.”

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. Care plans included information about medication and past medical history. Care staff confirmed training to meet identified healthcare needs. They understood what actions they should take in medical emergencies and were for example, able to describe the possible signs of a stroke or if a person may have an infection. The management team were aware of how to access health and social care professionals should there be a need. A family member told us staff had taken action to seek treatment for a person saying, “He (relative) had a very stiff neck. The health team prescribed a painkilling gel which can be used regularly, it does help him.”

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. The service used a formal process to record observations such as pulse, blood pressure and responsiveness to provide accurate information to health professionals should someone appear unwell. Care staff were able to describe changes in a person’s skin which may indicate skin integrity concerns. People’s weight was monitored at a frequency in line with their risk. External professionals told us they were contacted appropriately.

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 decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act 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. Care staff understood their responsibilities in relation to the mental capacity and consent and that people had the right to decline offered/required care in which case they would try later or a different staff member. Decision specific MCA and best interest decisions were in place where people were unable to make an informed decision about their care or medication.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA, whether any restrictions on people's liberty had been authorised and whether any conditions on such authorisations were being met. Dols were in place and had been reapplied for when required. An external professional told us “Yes the DoLS are appropriately applied for. The manager has a good understanding of the legislation.”