Grove Court

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 good. At this assessment, the rating has remained 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 care needs were assessed before they moved to Grove Court. This information was used as the basis of a care plan that recorded people’s individual care needs and preferences. The registered manager recognised the format of the care planning system currently meant the text did not consistently read in a person centred manner. Plans were already underway to change the electronic care planning system this year.

Staff were knowledgeable in how to support people and understood individual communication needs. Records showed people’s health was reviewed routinely, and referrals were made promptly when needed.

The provider always 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. They worked to develop evidence-based good practice and standards.

The staff team ensured regular monitoring of people’s healthcare needs took place through the use of nationally recognised assessment tools. For example, records showed use of the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) to identify where people may be at increased risk of weight loss and where further referrals needed to be escalated. Where risks to people were identified, the service took appropriate steps to mitigate these. We fed back some improvements were needed to a risk assessment tool implemented by the provider who in turn demonstrated a commitment to continuously review their assessment tools in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice.

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.

People and their relatives told us they were supported to have access to health care professionals such as their GP when needed. This ensured people were supported to maintain their health and well-being needs. A healthcare professional told us, “When I have visited residents they all seem happy and well cared for.” A second professional said, “[People] are referred to me when there is need and in a timely manner. Staff chase up referrals and make sure that they have been sent to me and contact me if any [people] under our care [need input].”

Care records demonstrated when health care professionals had been involved in people’s care. Staff knew the people they supported well and ensured healthcare recommendations were carried out. A professional commented, “If there are any requests we have after our assessments, such as implementing different care plans, equipment, or regimes the carers implement these promptly.”

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. Staff worked in partnership with the local GP practice to ensure people received responsive and preventative healthcare that met their needs. Healthcare professionals were highly complementary about the service with one telling us, “Grove Court consistently advocate strongly for [people]. All the staff members that I've met care deeply about [people] and I trust them all without question. They have a core group of committed competent nurses, and I always feel that they are completely on top of each patient's situation, I'd be very happy if one of my family was a resident there.”

People at risk of choking or malnutrition were supported to maintain safe and consistent diets. Referrals to speech and language therapists were made for those needing assistance with swallowing, and meals were fortified to improve nutritional intake where needed. The catering and kitchen team was led by a chef manager knowledgeable about individuals' specific dietary requirements, including allergies and preferences.

We received overwhelmingly positive comments about the wide variety and choice of nutritious food provided. Mealtimes were an extremely positive experience; people were served their food within a professional restaurant environment with beautifully presented meals and an accompanying range of beverages. One person told us, “The food is very varied in regions and very good, we had Asian spices yesterday, we get plenty of vegetables, plenty of fruit and have some very good meat dishes.” A person’s relative told us, “The food is incredible, restaurant quality and plenty of choice.” Another relative said, “Real efforts are made to create a stimulating environment, and the food, an important element, is varied and high quality. I can vouch for that as I attended their excellent Christmas lunch which was really well managed. I've also spoken several times to the head chef who clearly goes to great lengths to meet people's expectations and often exceeds them.”

Tables were laid out attractively with tablecloths, condiments and flowers. An extensive variety of drinks were offered before and during the meal including people’s personal choice of alcohol. We observed staff to be patient, discrete and reassuring when assisting people with their meals.

The provider monitored all people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they fully met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. A relative told us, “I would recommend Grove Court, it is a fine and shining example of how elderly living and care should be delivered. All round a fantastic place to be.”

Staff monitored the effectiveness of the care people received took action to improve people’s quality of life where needed. The approach and coordinated team response from staff and nurses ensured people received the best possible outcomes. Regular care plan reviews enabled the team to have full oversight of the health and social care needs of all people in their care and supported them to maintain their independence around decision making.

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

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The MCA requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the MCA. In care homes, and some hospitals, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People had mental capacity assessments, DOLS applications and authorisations, and best interest decisions in place for all necessary decisions. DNACPR (Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation) documents in place to ensure staff had all the relevant information. Records showed people were involved in making decisions made about their care.

Staff received training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and understood the importance of people’s consent. Staff told us they always obtained consent from the person before supporting them with personal care tasks. We observed staff providing information in ways people could understand and allowed time for decision-making. People told us staff sought their consent. One person said, “I am happier here, they cut my hair and I was pleased about that. All the staff talk to me, staff come at 8 in the morning and that suits me and I go to bed when I want.”