Valeries Care Home and Valeries Home Care

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

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 assessed and reviewed people’s health, care, wellbeing and communication needs to ensure care and treatment was effective. People were involved in these assessments, and their views were taken into account.

People had detailed care and support plans which provided clear guidance for staff on how to meet their needs. These were regularly reviewed and updated when people’s needs changed.

The provider had processes in place to assess people’s needs before care commenced. Assessments were person-centred and considered people’s physical, emotional and social needs to ensure the provider could meet them safely. Assessments were completed with people and, where relevant, their relatives. Relatives told us they were involved and felt able to contribute to care planning. One relative said, “I’ve seen the care plan and if there’s anything I want to ask, I can. I can be involved as much as I choose, we have a very good relationship with the home.”

This helped to ensure people received care that was, personalised and responsive to their needs.

The provider planned and delivered care and treatment in line with current legislation, guidance and evidence-based practice. Care was provided in a way that reflected what was important to people.

Information from assessments was used to inform care planning and support the delivery of personalised care.

Staff used nationally recognised tools, for example to assess pressure area risk and to monitor people’s level of independence. This supported risk assessment and informed decision-making, ensuring care was delivered safely and in line with best practice.

The provider worked with healthcare professionals to support people’s needs. Referrals were made in a timely way to external services, including GPs and the district nursing team, when specialist support was required.

Staff demonstrated an understanding of how to support people with specific healthcare needs, including those requiring modified diets.

The provider worked effectively with staff, teams and external services to support people. Systems were in place to share information appropriately to ensure continuity of care when people moved between services.

Staff worked collaboratively with healthcare professionals and other services involved in people’s care. Changes in people’s needs and opportunities to improve care were discussed during handovers and team communication.

Feedback from healthcare professionals was positive. They said the provider communicated in a timely way and staff shared clear and accurate information when required. One professional told us they “Observe kindness, dignity and compassion in their care.”

The registered manager had oversight of people’s care and how staff worked with other services to meet their needs, including during hospital admissions and discharges, to help ensure continuity and safety.

People spoke positively about staff knowledge and teamwork. One person said, “They certainly know what they’re doing.”

This supported people to receive coordinated, consistent and safe care.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing and to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff monitored people’s health and acted promptly when additional medical input was required

People were assisted to maintain good nutrition and hydration. Where people required modified diets, these were provided in line with their assessed needs. People spoke positively about the quality and variety of food available. The chef told us they regularly spoke with people about their preferences and would offer alternatives to meet their choices.

Relatives provided positive feedback about the impact of care on people’s wellbeing and independence. One relative said, “When [person] went to Valerie’s Care Home, she stopped wandering about. [Person] used to use a stick but now doesn’t need it. The staff have helped [person] get some independence back.”

The provider monitored people’s care and treatment to ensure positive and consistent outcomes. Systems were in place to review care and identify opportunities for improvement.

When people moved into the home, their needs, preferences and choices were assessed using recognised tools. Care plans were regularly reviewed and updated to ensure they remained accurate and reflected people’s current needs.

Staff monitored people’s health and wellbeing through daily observations and engagement with healthcare professionals, including GPs when needed. This enabled staff to respond to changes without delay and meant people’s care responsive, effective and tailored to their individual needs. Staff monitored risks associated with nutrition and skin integrity, including fluid intake and repositioning, to help prevent dehydration and pressure damage.

The provider supported people to make decisions about their care and treatment and respected their rights in line with legislation. Care was delivered in a person-centred way, with people involved in decisions wherever possible.

Care plans included information about people’s capacity to make specific decisions and the level of support they required. Where people lacked capacity, mental capacity assessments were completed, and best interest decisions were made involving relevant professionals and family members.

The provider acted in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Staff had received training and demonstrated an understanding of the principles of the MCA, including supporting people to make their own decisions where possible.

Applications for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were made appropriately. Where people were subject to continuous supervision and control, legal authorisation was in place to ensure their rights were protected.

Staff encouraged people to make day-to-day choices about their care. We observed staff giving people time to make decisions and respecting their preferences. People and their relatives were involved in decisions about care and treatment.