The Churchley Rest Home Limited

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 the previous inspection the provider was in breach of legal regulation in relation to consent. The provider had not always sought consent from people or consent had not always been recorded. Mental Capacity Assessments were out of date and not decision specific. Deprivation of Safeguarding Liberty had not been considered and in some cases, they were required.

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.

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. Previous areas requiring improvement identified at the last inspection had been met in respect to people’s care plans containing accurate and up to date information. All care plans were now recorded on an electronic system, they detailed people’s individual care needs and preferences. There now was an effective system in place to regularly review and update people’s care plans. People had pre assessments carried out before moving into the home.

One person told us, "They help me when I need it." A relative told us, "They understand [relative's] routine and are generally ‘hands off’, supporting them to stay independent.”

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. Records showed the use of nationally recognised assessment tools, for example the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) for monitoring people’s weight. Staff gave us examples of what they had put in place to support people to monitor and maintain a healthy weight, such as buying specific food items and snacks. Staff told us how they used hydration sweets to try and support people to stay hydrated.

One person told us, "I have the choice, they help me keeping my diet going."

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. We saw referrals were made when people needed support from community professionals. People had hospitals passports in place to ensure appointments went smoothly.

Community professional told us, "The home has made significant improvements in its reporting practices and communication processes. The service demonstrates a strong commitment to supporting and maintaining the wellbeing of people living in the home and has a positive track record in preventing avoidable hospital admissions through proactive care and effective support strategies.”

One relative told us, “There is not much change in the staff, and some have been here for a long time. There’s always staff around when I come to visit.”

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. The home freshly prepared healthy homecooked meals on site. People with dietary needs had different food options available to them.

One person told us, "There is a set menu for food, but they will adapt to my choices and preferences."

The home worked with community professionals to ensure people had support to promote healthy living, for example regular exercise classes took place at the home.

Community professionals told us, "As a supplier we have always been made to feel welcome and part of the team working with the residents so made aware of any support needs or changes so that we can adapted our sessions accordingly."

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. People told us the staff knew their needs well and the had support from community professionals when they needed. A community professional told us, “More residents were now getting the onward referrals they needed because concerns were being highlighted and raised to the appropriate professionals.

One relative told us, "The manager has decided to put in some extra training for the staff to help (relative).” Another relative told us, "More often they go direct and call paramedics, they know what the best route is.”

Community professionals told us how the staff ensured people received positive outcomes. A Community professional said, "End-of-life care is delivered compassionately and is well supported by the district nursing team. A recent example of effective multidisciplinary working involved the local GP practice and occupational therapy team supporting the home to evidence the need for specialist equipment for an individual. Following this assessment, appropriate equipment, including a hoist and hospital bed, was secured and provided."

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Previous areas requiring improvement identified at the last inspection had been met in respect to staff knowledge and understanding around the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), and the recording of consent.

Staff told us how they sought guidance around carrying out mental capacity assessments. Consent was now recorded in people’s care plans. The registered manager told us how they now had an electronic device so people could sign their consent more easily. For people who were unable to give consent themselves, staff liaised with relevant people to ensure decisions were made in their best interest. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The MCA 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 make particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the MCA. In care homes, and some hospitals, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).