The Ridings 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. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this. Some people did tell us they felt a little bored at times, more activity and stimulation would be beneficial. Aside from this people and their loves ones told us they felt their needs were met effectively. People liked the food and drink options available to them and were offered generous portions. People’s health was monitored using recognised and effective tools, to provide preventative care where possible. Staff knew when people may struggle to make decisions for themselves and when they might need some support. Staff at this inspection had a much better understanding of what it meant for people to be subject to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards when they did not have capacity to make decisions about their care.

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. People and their loved ones told us they were involved in the assessment of their needs. Before people moved into the home, a detailed assessment was completed. The management team considered how people would mix with others living at the home and whether the staff could meet their needs. People had communication plans in place to help guide staff. This helped staff to ensure they were supporting people in the way they wanted. People’s needs were routinely reviewed, a range of tools were used to assist with this process. People and their relatives told us they felt staff knew their needs well. One relative said, “[The staff] know [my loved one] well. Some of them have been there a few years.” One person told us, “[The staff] all know me well and are very friendly.”

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. We saw that people’s nutrition and hydration needs were met in line with current guidance. People and their loved ones spoke positively about the food and drink options available to them. One person told us, “The food is lovely and there is always a choice.” A relative said, “The food is very nice.” We saw people were offered snacks and regular drinks. We saw on one occasions staff using plated options to help a person living with dementia chose what they wanted to eat, this clearly helped them. On other occasions we did not see this approach being used with people living with dementia. The management team told us this should be standard practice amongst the staff team. We saw people being offered a wide range of drinks and being given plenty of time to eat their food.

Staff had access to care plans, risk assessments, monitoring records and policies and procedures to help them plan and deliver effective treatment and support. Staff held regular handover meetings to help them ensure continuity of care. There was a written record of these meetings which provided the team with a useful summary reminder of people’s basic needs and risks. It also reminded staff about any recent changes to people’s needs or wellbeing. We saw staff sharing concerns with the GP who had come for a pre-arranged visit. Staff were very knowledgeable about changes in people’s wellbeing. They understood signs of possible deterioration and made sure the GP had all the information needed to support people well. Staff told us they worked together well as a team. The local GP told us they staff team were “caring and proactive in identifying patients who may be of concern- prompting a review.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to fully maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. For example we saw that people were being supported to in some cases gain weight by having fortified meals, snacks and drinks. In other cases people were aiming to lose weight by being offered healthy meal options and snacks. The management team explained that it was the general procedure of the service to check on each person every hour. People could choose not to be checked on this frequently if they wished. These checks were part of the way in which staff regularly monitored people’s health and wellbeing. We saw evidence that staff had regard for people’s emotional and mental wellbeing as well as physical. People were asked about how they were feeling and their mood was recorded. We saw people being encouraged to spend time outside in the sunshine in the gardens, even if just for a short while, to get fresh air and improve their sense of wellbeing.

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. Systems ensured the care provided to people was monitored effectively. This meant any changes could be noticed early and acted upon. For example if a person had developed a slight cough the GP was notified. This meant care could be provided to prevent deterioration where possible.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People and their loved ones told us their views were considered when developing care plans. If there was concern that a person may struggle to decide for themselves, their capacity to make that decision was assessed. This ensured staff were guided to support people in line with their wishes and beliefs. Decisions made on people’s behalf were the least restrictive options and in their best interests. Staff understood what could effect a person’s ability to make decisions for themselves. We saw staff seeking people’s consent before providing care.