The Croft Nursing Home (Barrow)

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 needs were continually assessed. People and others important in their care had been involved in regular assessments of their needs. We found assessments were up to date and considered the persons health, care, wellbeing and communication needs. Assessment tools such as food and fluid charts and weight logs were part of peoples care plans. People’s choices had been used to plan their individual care and support needs.

People’s assessments and care plans were reviewed regularly and updated where needed to reflect any changing needs. Families were invited to be involved in and contribute to regular reviews.

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.

We found care plans were up to date with current legislation and reflected people’s needs. The service was able to demonstrate how they were meeting the underpinning principles of Right support, right care, right culture.

People’s dietary requirements were fully supported by kitchen staff, and an easy read traffic light system was in place to allow service users choice in relation to healthy meal options. Staff monitored people’s appetites and kept a record of people’s weights to help identify people who were at risk of malnutrition.

People’s food and fluid needs and choices were recorded by staff in real time and were up to date. People were supported to make healthier choices in relation to the meals they chose. A relative told us, “[Relative] has a limited diet, teatime smells amazing, food looks lovely.” Laminated cards and menus were available for people to use to support their understanding

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.

Peoples care plans were updated electronically in real time by care staff. They did this by use of handheld electronic devices. Staff worked well with external professionals who had specialist knowledge and shared information where needed to help support people. Staff worked well together and information was shared and communicated regularly within the wider staff teams.

Staff meetings were used for sharing information and best practice. There was evidence of staff working collaboratively to understand and meet people’s needs.

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 were supported to access a range of health care professionals and staff monitored people’s health and well-being daily. There were regular visits from health care professionals including GPs. People were referred to specialist services where needed, for example SALT (speech and language therapist). This meant that people received the care and support they needed around their food and fluids. This information was recorded on peoples care plans. Staff were able to review and change this information quickly if there were any changes.

Relatives we spoke to told us they had no concerns about people’s health needs being met.

One relative told us that the service, “Talk to [relative] about providing healthy food, a balanced diet, if had lots of biscuits say have fruit instead, encourage healthy eating.” Another said, “They know his dietary needs, they try to reinforce that.”

We discussed with the cook the recent introduction of healthy eating plans for people. Support and encouragement was provided for people to understand why this was important. A traffic light system was used in an easy-to-read format that represented different food types. This connected with the traffic light system seen on food packaging in shops.The cook was also involved in pre admission assessments to understand the persons dietary needs and required support. Themed food nights were in place.

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.

We found people had support to improve and maintain their quality of life by accessing social opportunities and encouragement to develop new skills and build independence. People’s goals and outcomes were recognised, and people were fully supported to achieve them. We saw evidence of achievements; these were recorded and celebrated.

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

The service informed people and their families about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People and their families received information about their care in a way that they understood.

Consent to care was recorded clearly within people’s care records the provider was meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Records included assessments of people’s capacity and best interest decisions where required. Families told us that people were asked for their consent before care or treatment was given.