Maidstone Care Centre

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 made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

People’s needs were assessed before they moved to the service to ensure the service and staff would be able to effectively meet people’s individual needs. People’s needs were regularly reviewed by staff, the assessments included nationally recognised tools such as the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST). A staff member said, “We are the ones on the ground -we see things and let the nurses know to review and update. Sometimes you notice the person has changed but the care plan hasn't been updated, we let the nurses know.” People and relatives confirmed they were involved in their risk assessments and care planning. Care plans were holistic and included important information about people’s lives, their protected characteristics such as any cultural or spiritual needs or any disabilities and details how staff could support people to meet their needs.

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.

For example, people’s nutrition and hydration needs and risks were risk assessed and monitored where required. Staff supported people in line with national guidance where people required modified diets such as soft or fortified food. Staff had received relevant training to understand these needs and how to meet them. People were generally happy with the food they received and told us, “There is enough to eat.” A relative said, “[Relative] is very happy with the food and has made comments [they] ask for extras.”

We observed staff followed professional’s guidance where people required staff support to eat or mobilise safely. A staff member said, “I check care plan to know moving and handling plan and how to look after the clients.”

A professional told us, “I have such confidence and admiration on each care team member to enforce high standards of care and be quick to address any concerns or queries."

The provider worked well across most teams and services to support people. There had been a recent issue with partnership working with some professionals around people’s medicines management which we have reported on under the Safe domain, Medicine Optimisation quality statement. The provider made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

People told us the service worked with other health and social care professionals to support their needs. A person said, “The GP visits every week.” A relative said, “The doctor does come in to check [relative] and sometimes [relative] goes to hospital. They are very good at facilitating visits to hospital the doctor always home visits.” Staff confirmed they worked well with healthcare professionals to meet people’s needs. A staff member said, “The GP has a weekly phone call round. If [they] need to see someone or something [they] come for a visit. [We do] district nurse referrals if there is skin damage or developing pressure sores. They will put a treatment plan in place.”

A professional was complimentary about their experience of working with staff. They said, “I work with themso regularly I view the care team as my colleagues and always look to maintain our strong working relationship as we all strive to achieve a common goal, we share which is the best care of the residents at the home.”

Staff told us they worked well together as a team to meet people’s needs. They told us people’s care and needs were discussed daily to ensure people received the care they needed. A staff member told us, “We have daily handover. We discuss what is happening in the home and if there is something to know and follow up. We also, read it on our devices and sign."

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.

People and relatives felt the home supported them to maintain their physical health and people had access to relevant professionals for their health or social care needs. A relative said, “When [relative’s] been poorly, they chase the doctor to sort it all out and nip it in the bud.”

People were encouraged to maintain their independence and make choices to support them to live healthier lives for example choice around their food and fluid intake.

People were also encouraged to mobilise or take part in exercises within the home to support their physical health. People were encouraged to maintain social links for their well-being, to socialise with other people and staff in the home and engage in activities.

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’s risk assessments and care plans contained clear guidance about how to monitor people’s care and ensure they received good outcomes. Care plans contained information about how people wanted to receive their care and goals. Staff monitored people’s care to ensure it met their needs. A staff member said, “I run the shift. I monitor the care staff make sure they are doing well. I check the PCS (electronic care monitoring) software to make sure everything is ok.”

A person gave an example of how they were supported to achieve a positive outcome. They told us, “I couldn’t walk when I first came in here. Now I am walking with a 4-wheeled walker.” Relatives also felt staff supported people’s needs well and enabled them to achieve good outcomes. A relative said, “[Relative] looks better, [their] skin is better.” Another said, “[Relative] was in bed and couldn’t do anything when [they] came in [to the home]. Now [they have] got a special chair and [they are] up every day in lounge with the others."

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

Staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and now followed these in practice. A staff member said, “You assume people have capacity and always seek their consent. Even when a record says they don't have [capacity] you still engage and ask for their consent as much as possible. People are different at different times of the day.” People confirmed staff asked for their consent. A person said, “They ask permission before they do something.” Another person told us, “The carers knock on the door before they come in.”

Records had improved and demonstrated that people’s capacity to make specific decisions were assessed in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act. Where people were assessed as lacking capacity, appropriate others such as professionals and advocates such as nominated family members were involved in best interest decision about the person’s care.