Fryers House - Care Home with Nursing Physical Disabilities

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.

The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to consent. Enough improvements were found at this assessment, and the provider was no longer in breach of this regulation. ​

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.

Since the last assessment, the provider had reviewed and updated people’s care plans to reflect their current support needs. Records showed assessments and reviews captured relevant information, helping staff deliver care in line with people’s needs.

People told us they were involved in decisions about their care and took part in care plan reviews. People said staff listened to them and took account of their views, preferences and changes in their needs. This demonstrated a person‑centred and collaborative approach.

The provider used a range of assessment tools to understand each person’s needs and inform care delivery aimed at achieving positive outcomes. Staff clearly described how they identified changes in people’s needs and escalated these appropriately. Staff explained the steps they took to ensure changes were reviewed and accurately reflected in people’s care planning records. This helped ensure care remained effective, responsive and aligned with people’s current needs.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

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 told us they were supported to have choice and control over their lives, including decisions that impacted their physical and emotional wellbeing, and described how staff supported them to maintain their emotional wellbeing by noticing changes in mood and escalating concerns when needed. People told us they felt listened to and supported, and said staff helped them manage both their physical and emotional health needs.

People told us they were supported to make choices about food and drink and said staff supported them to eat and drink in ways that met their health needs and preferences. Staff worked with people and health professionals where required to support nutritional needs, helping people maintain their wellbeing and independence. One person told us, “Lots of choice with food and loads of variety.”

The manager demonstrated a clear commitment to holistic care, and this was reflected in feedback from people who spoke positively about how staff supported them to explore and work towards goals that mattered to them.

The manager described how they actively supported discussions with people about their future wishes, aspirations and goals as part of a more holistic approach to care. For example, 1 person was supported to access specialist equipment to improve their safety, mobility and independence following changes in their needs. This support aligned with the person’s goals and was provided alongside specialist input to help them progress further.

People confirmed they were being supported to manage their immediate health needs while also maintaining their independence and pursuing meaningful goals.

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.

At the last assessment, we identified missed opportunities for early intervention and escalation, along with inconsistent recording of personal care tasks. At this assessment, we found this had improved. Records were more detailed and completed consistently, which supported effective oversight of people’s care.

Care plans clearly detailed specific indicators for staff to observe in relation to people’s health, wellbeing and personal care needs. Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of these indicators and described how they used them in practice to identify changes, take preventative action and escalate concerns appropriately. One person told us, “If I tell them something is wrong, I tend to have a nurse with me within 5 minutes.”

Staff explained how they monitored people’s needs and sought timely professional input when required. People confirmed staff were responsive to changes and supported escalation to relevant healthcare professionals when needed. This helped ensure concerns were addressed promptly and care remained effective and responsive.

Overall, the provider had strengthened systems for monitoring, reviewing and improving outcomes, enabling earlier intervention, reducing the risk of deterioration and ensuring care was delivered in line with people’s needs and best practice.

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

People told us staff sought their consent before providing care, and we observed this in practice, demonstrating respectful and individualised care delivery.

People described being able to express their wishes and preferences clearly and said staff listened to them and acted in line with their choices. This supported people to feel involved and in control of their care and treatment. One person told us, “I want to feel like what anyone else would do living their own lives. I want that control and ownership. Staff respect that."

Where people were assessed as lacking capacity, the provider had appropriate records in place. These included decision‑specific mental capacity assessments and best‑interest decisions, which clearly documented how decisions had been reached and who had been involved. This showed improvement since the last assessment, where recording was not always sufficiently detailed.

Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and how to apply it in practice. Staff explained how they supported people to make decisions wherever possible, respected people’s right to make unwise decisions, and acted lawfully when people lacked capacity. This ensured care and treatment were provided in a way that upheld people’s rights and protected them from unlawful or inappropriate practice.