Frindsbury 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.

Leaders and staff knew people well and could identify when people’s needs changed. People had detailed care plans which informed staff of people’s needs and how best to support the manager told us, “Care planning is taken on as a team, this team involves not only the staff but the GP, district nurses and any other teams that are involved. We include the resident where possible and their families.”

People and their relatives told us staff knew them well and could anticipate their needs. A relative told us, “Absolutely, he does suffer with epilepsy, he will go vacant, but staff always know and they phone the doctor, they come round or they take him to hospital.” Relatives told us staff could anticipate when their person was in pain through their presentation and supported them with pain relief when necessary. A relative told us, “I’m just glad she went there [Frindsbury House], based on previous conversations with family this is by far the best.” A healthcare professional told us, “Staff know people so well.”

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.

Leaders had good understanding of best practice guidance, including for example the use of STOMP. The service had supported people with Huntingdon’s for many years, and staff were well versed in how to support people, and signs of their conditions progressing and were able to support people with this in a sensitive way.

Healthcare professionals told us staff had strong knowledge and awareness of supporting people. Comments included, “I find they are specialists in their area. They are not nurses but they have a lot of knowledge about Huntingdon's,” and “Staff follow advice and query if have any concerns, staff communication with the surgery is excellent.” Another healthcare professional told us they never had to remind staff about how to support people well, including for example following best practice guidance regarding oral care.

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.

Leaders and staff worked well with a range of professionals to provide people with joined up care. Healthcare professionals told us staff were helpful, listed and asked for advice to improve people’s lives. A healthcare professional told us, “There is a culture of respect for service users and their needs appear paramount. I was running late, called the home, [staff] agreed to stay late to facilitate a visit.” Another professional told us when they visit the service they, “Always get a full handover and history of patient on arrival.”

People accessed a range of healthcare professionals. Relatives and people told us staff worked well with professionals. A relative told us, “She has been diagnosed by the speech and language therapist, I think they have seen her every year to be fair.” Another told us, “They liaise with GP surgery on medical issues and appear to go above and beyond for their service users.”

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 and encouraged to be as healthy as possible. Where possible staff encouraged people to move frequently to ensure muscles did not waste and to keep as much independence as possible. People were engaged in a range of activities to support them to live healthy lives. This included swimming and visiting a hydro pool. One person was supported to make healthier options and successfully reduced their weight to a healthier weight.

People were supported to ensure they maintained health appointments. For example, through regular dentist appointments. The was also a weekly visit with a paramedic from the GP surgery. Staff told us when they need support with people's health, they utilised 111 and 999 where appropriate. A healthcare professional told us, “Staff are always helpful and willing to do what I put in place.”

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.

Staff were alert to people’s needs and always working to ensure people received the best care and support. For example, 1 person moved from another service which could not meet their needs. The person was supported with knowledgeable staff, who helped reduce their tremors. A healthcare professional told us, “Their appearance changed massively, and they have been on holiday since moving to Frindsbury house. I’ve seen a massive difference.”

The manager told us of another person who staff had supported. They told us, “I am incredibly proud of the progress he has made and the way the team worked together to improve his quality of life.”

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

People’s capacity was assessed, and people were empowered to make decisions about their care and support. However, capacity assessments had not always been updated to ensure they remained appropriate. We raised this with the provider who took action to address this.

Where people had capacity this was clearly documented within their care plans. Care plans reflected occasions where people had declined treatment or assessments and the reasons why they have declined. This included actions on how these issues were resolved. A staff member told us, “We try our best to ensure consent is always asked, some people do not have capacity but are still able to indicate yes or no with regards to care or activities.”

Staff told us they understood how to support people’s decision making. Relatives told us how people were supported to make their own choices, and that people’s decisions were respected. A relative told us, “[Person] has capacity, so I am never involved, she makes her own choices.”