Cedardale Residential Home

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 as 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.

The provider carried out assessments of people’s needs before they used the service, and people told us they were involved in the assessment process. A person told us, “I am involved in my care, and I am invited to my reviews.” A relative told us, “They take the time to call us in, and I am asked for my input when we update [person’s] care plan.”

People’s health was monitored to ensure they received suitable support and input from external professionals when needed. People’s care plans were detailed and included nationally recognised assessment tools, such as the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) to assess people’s nutritional needs, and WATERLOW, to assess people’s skin integrity and reduce the risk of developing pressure sores. One person told us, “They always get the doctor if I need it.” Another person told us, “I sometimes experience pain, and the staff know when this is happening and give me pain relief.”

The registered manager told us they sought and reviewed feedback from other health care professionals involved in people’s care to maximise the health and wellbeing of the people who they supported. They told us, “We do a lot of audits. For example, we look at skin care, people’s weights, and bowel movements so we can pick up on any changes as soon as they appear.” Staff told us they continually assessed people’s health and updated their care records toaccurately reflect their needs. Staff we spoke with knew people’s needs well. One staff member told us, “We take the time to get to know our residents well. They are like our family, we want to know how they like to be called, their history, and what they like and don’t like.”

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.

People were provided with care and support which met their needs and expectations. A person told us, “I often tell my son, “I’m so glad you got me in here.””

People’s nutritional and hydration needs were assessed and planned for. Care plans were detailed, and staff followed the professional advice given to keep people safe. One relative told us, “It can be difficult to get [person] to drink enough but the staff know they love a [certain] cordial and give them that to keep their fluids up.”

Staff told us they monitored and recorded people’s weight, bowel movements, skin condition, nutrition and hydration intake several times daily, and this was evidenced in the daily notes and care records we viewed.

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.

The management and staff teams worked jointly with other services and professionals to ensure people received effective and timely care. Where people had lost weight, staff made referrals to the dietician, and in the case of a person at risk of choking, the speech and language therapy team (SALT) were involved.

A health care professional told us, “Cedardale Residential Care Home contact us regularly about the residents’ needs so there is good continuity of care for people.”

Staff attended daily handover meetings and shared relevant information about people appropriately with other services and teams involved in their care, to ensure people’s needs, and any changes in their needs, were understood and followed. The registered manager told us, “We are transparent and have a good relationship with our health partners. We value their support because it keeps our residents safe and well.”

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 had access to the health care services they needed to maximise their health and wellbeing. For example, people were supported to attend appointments with the GP, the dentist and the chiropodist.

Each person had a hospital passport which they took with them when they transferred to hospital or moved between services. A hospital passport is a document that provides health care professionals with essential information about a person’s individual needs and preferences.

One relative told us, “Staff will call the GP for [person’s name] if ever it’s needed, and they will call me to let me know they have done so.”

Care records showed that a range of health care professionals were involved in the care and treatment of people, and staff made appropriate and timely referrals to support people to stay healthy. Staff followed the recommendations of professionals, who confirmed that the staff teams worked closely with them to ensure that people’s health and medical needs wereoptimised. A health care professional told us, “We work collaboratively with Cedardale Residential Care Home to provide good input for the residents that meets their needs. For example, while respecting the wishes of [person] the staff also promote healthier meal choices at every opportunity.”

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.

The management team met with people frequently to check that people were happy with their care. The registered manager told us, “One resident is under the care of the district nurse for pressure care, another for continence management. We involve the person and, with consent, their family so everyone knows what is going on.”

The staff told us that they encouraged people to share their thoughts, opinions and preferences routinely with them, to improve their care experience. One staff member told us, “By knowing how they are feeling and what they like, they stay happy.”

Care plans detailed the outcomes expected from the care and treatment delivered to people, and staff knew what these outcomes were. For example, we saw bowel monitoring charts for people and associated guidance for staff to support them to remain healthy.

Staff supervisions and spot checks had taken place regularly and staff told us they found it supportive and helpful. One staff member told us, “I feel supported and valued in my role because the managers tell us all the time we’re valued. The managers will help you if they can and are approachable.”

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

People, and their relatives where necessary, gave their consent to the care and treatment they received, and people’s liberty was promoted in line with legal guidance. One person told us, “The carers ask for my permission before they help me.” A relative told us, “Because [person] couldn’t decide, the staff asked me for my permission for them to have the flu jab.”

People’s capacity to make specific decisions was assessed and documented in their care plan. Where people had been assessed as lacking capacity to make a specific decision, relatives and relevant health and social care professionals were involved in making a best interest’s decision on the person’s behalf, for example, to wear a lap belt when using a wheelchair.

Staff had completed training in the MCA and understood their responsibility to gain consent from people in line with the principles of the Act. One staff member told us, “I always assume they have capacity to make the decision first and ask for their opinion.”

People told us they made choices about day-to-day decisions such as meals and drinks they had, and the activities they wanted to do.