Bower Grange Residential Care Home Also known as http://crmlive/epublicsector_oui_enu/start.swe?SWECmd=GotoView&SWEView=HC+Account+Dashboard+View&SWE

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.This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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, well being and communication needs with them.

People’s needs were thoroughly assessed prior to admission, to ensure they could be met. The provider used this information to develop plans of care, and these were reviewed regularly to ensure they remained current.

People's relatives told us they were involved in their family member's care and with people’s care plan reviews.

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 received consistent positive feedback from people and their relatives about the quality of food served at the home. One person said, “The food is really good, I have been putting on weight since I came here.” A health professional told us, “The cook provides fantastic homemade food and is aware of every resident's needs and special requirements.”

We observed the mealtime experience and found carers treated people with dignity and respect when they were assisted to eat.

If people were not eating the meals they had chosen, staff offered them alternatives.

People had access to drinks in their bedrooms and drinks were available in communal areas.

Where people required their food to be provided in a different format to avoid choking, we saw this was provided.

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.

During our inspection, we observed staff worked well together to help deliver people’s day to day support. Comments from staff included, “We get on and work well together.”

The registered manager told us about the good working relationship they had with health professionals that supported people. Feedback from these professionals supported that, one told us, “They are willing to take on board any advice provided and implement new ideas that are suggested to ensure the residents life/experience at Bower Grange is optimized.”

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.

We saw people looked well cared for and happy. People and relatives told us they had no concerns with the support their family members received with healthcare. They said staff at the home would contact a health professional if needed.

The provider had an activities staff member who was employed to plan and provide people with meaningful activities to ensure their hobbies and interests were maintained.

People’s needs were assessed to identify any concerns regarding their health and well-being. Staff knew people well and could explain how they supported people to live a healthy life and provide meaningful activities to help people’s well-being.

The provider worked with healthcare services to meet people’s health needs including arranging and supporting people to attend health appointments.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. Systems such as audits, care reviews and daily monitoring charts supported oversight of care delivery and individual outcomes. They ensured outcomes were positive and consistent, and they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

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

We observed people being offered choices during our visit.

Staff told us where people had the capacity to do so they were encouraged to make their own decisions and wherever possible this was done together with their relatives. Where people did not have capacity, they supported people in their best interests. Care plans demonstrated the Mental Capacity Act had been followed, and where necessary, a mental capacity assessment had been completed. Staff had received training around the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

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, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to make decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible.

Where the home had placed restrictions on people, appropriate authorisation to do so was sought. The registered manager maintained oversight of these authorisations and applied to renew them in a timely manner.