Fallowfield

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.

The last rating for this key question was Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good. This meant people using the service were receiving effective care and treatment.

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 told us they were involved in assessing and reviewing their needs. A person told us, “Any instructions are followed and they [staff] all talk to each other.” Another person commented, “They [staff] always check, I think it is a ritual.”

People’s needs were assessed before moving into the service. The registered manager told us, “Upon admission, people and their relatives are provided with an information pack. This includes details about who I am, my role within the home, and how to contact both myself and the nursing team at any time. We believe this helps to build trust and ensures families feel informed and supported from the outset.”

Assessments reflected people’s physical and mental health, wellbeing and communication needs. Assessments helped to formulate individualised care plans. Care plans were comprehensive, individualised, and contained information about people’s needs, wishes, cultural needs and what was important to them. Reviews were conducted on a regular basis to ensure care plans remained up to date, particularly when there were changes in people’s conditions, circumstances or wishes.

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.

Assessments of people's care and risks were supported by the use of best practise and clinical assessment tools. For example, evidence-based guidance such as the malnutrition universal screening tool was used to help to identify those at risk of malnutrition.

People's nutrition, hydration, dietary and cultural needs were met. People told us they enjoyed the food and choice of menus on offer within the service. Comments included, “Food is really nice”, “I get choices and the food is very nice”, “The food is very good”, and “I enjoy the food provided.”

The chef was knowledgeable about people’s dietary needs and preference, including allergies, vegetarian and pescetarian diets and cultural choices. Records detailed people’s diary requirements including low sugar and modified textured diets. The chef told us they discussed people’s food preferences through the ‘resident of the day’ programme and at regular residents’ meetings where they asked people what they would like to see included on the menus. They commented, “I am here for people, and I want to cook what they like.”

We observed how people were supported at lunch time in the dining room. People were offered choices from pictured menus which were placed on tables and were offered a wide range of drinks. There were enough staff to assist people safely, and we saw positive interactions between people and staff.

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.

Staff had positive working relationships with visiting health and social care professionals and communication was effective. Care plans showed that staff communicated effectively with professionals on a regular basis including GPs, community mental health teams, palliative care teams, dietitians and local commissioning authorities amongst others.

Staff supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and future support needs. People told us they had access to health care professionals when they needed them. Comments included, “We can see the doctor or anyone we need, we only have to ask”, “Yes, whenever we ask or if staff notice something they get the appropriate person to come”, and “If I need to see someone they [staff] arrange it for me.”

Staff supported people to manage their health and wellbeing. People’s health and clinical needs were monitored and reviewed regularly by nursing and care staff. Care plans documented how best people should be supported and staff monitored people’s conditions and health needs on a regular basis, acting promptly if people became unwell. Appropriate and timely referrals were made to health care professionals when additional support was identified and required.

Staff monitored 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.

Staff were dedicated to ensuring people received good outcomes. Outcomes of people’s health and well-being were monitored by staff. Care plans and risk assessments were regularly reviewed to reflect people’s changing needs. For example, the recording and monitoring of people’s food and fluid intake to ensure they had appropriate levels of nutrition and hydration, and people’s weight was monitored to ensure that people at risk of skin integrity breakdown were repositioned where required and monitored.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control over their daily lives. People were supported to understand their rights around consent to care and treatment, and their views and wishes were considered when their care was planned. People who had capacity were supported to make choices and consent to their care.

When people lacked the mental capacity to make decisions, staff met with relatives where appropriate to ensure any decisions made, were in the person’s best interests. Staff promoted people's rights and worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The MCA provides a legal framework for making decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. The provider had requested legal authorisations where restrictions were in place. Any conditions in place were reviewed by staff and met.