Tree Vale Limited Acorn 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 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 service scored 71 (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 ensured people’s care and treatment were effective by assessing and regularly reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

People’s needs were assessed before they moved into the home. One relative told us, ‘’My mum coming here had helped us as a family, she is well cared for and we visit regularly and we are involved in updating her care plans.”

People’s needs were reviewed regularly and updated when changes occurred. Care plans were in place to guide staff on how to meet people’s needs effectively and safely

The provider did not always plan and deliver people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. Not all care plans had been updated and transferred onto the electronic care planning system while the provider was in the process of transferring from paper records. Additional detail was required to ensure care plans were more person centred. For example, in a number of care plans reviewed, it was not evident what some people’s preferences were in relation to their personal care. Gaps were identified in recording the daily care provided to people on the electronic recording system. The registered manager was responsive to concerns found and took timely action to address the issues identified.

However, people told us they were supported to eat and drink well. We observed people enjoying their meals in a calm and pleasant environment. People had access to food and drink throughout the day, and staff promoted choice. Kitchen staff knew people’s preferences well and adapted menus to meet their needs.

The provider worked effectively with other services and professionals to support people’s care. Systems were in place to share information, helping to ensure continuity of care and reducing the need for people to repeat their information when moving between services.

Staff worked closely with a range of healthcare professionals, including GPs, district nurses, podiatry and opticians. Staff told us they had positive working relationships with these services. Information and advice from professionals were shared with the staff team and reflected in people’s care records and staff handovers.

Staff spoke positively about teamwork, and the registered manager told us they were proud of the staff team. People and their families spoke highly of staff and how they worked together to meet people’s needs.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing, promoting independence, choice and control. Staff encouraged people to live healthier lives and aimed to reduce their future need for care and support.

Staff supported people to remain as independent and active as possible, providing prompts where needed. We observed people doing things they enjoyed such as tending to the garden pots, sweeping the garden paths, clearing and tidying used drink cups off the tables. We observed staff supporting people to eat and drink with kindness and patience.

People and their relatives told us they were confident staff would seek medical support when needed. One relative said, “If [family member] is unwell, they let us know immediately. Communication is good.”

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. For example, the provider monitored people’s care and support through regular reviews, audits and oversight. Records showed outcomes were checked to ensure care remained effective and consistent. However, the care records reviewed did evidence gaps in recording and the registered manager was aware of these issues and had identified improvements were needed to strengthen record keeping and build staff confidence in using the electronic system.

The provider supported people to understand their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

One person who was receiving a modified diet was unable to provide consent to this arrangement. There was no mental capacity assessment in place to determine their abilityto make this decision, and no best interest decision had been completed. This was rectified immediately by the registered manager during the assessment.

However, information about consent was shared with people when they moved into the home. Staff consistently sought people’s permission before providing care, and people’s decisions were respected. Where people had arrangements in place for decision-making, such as a Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA), this information was recorded. The registered manager had checked copies of LPAs to ensure they were valid and in place.