Elmcroft Care 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 inspection we rated this key question inadequate. At this inspection the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

At our last inspection the provider was in breach of the of legal regulations in relation to safeguarding. Improvements were found at this inspection, and the provider was no longer in breach of this regulation.

This service scored 71 (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 support was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. People’s assessments considered and recorded their individual preferences for support. People and relatives were consulted and involved throughout the assessment and care planning process. Relatives told us, “I am involved in [person’s] reviews and care plan and the planning for their future care”, “I am completely involved” and “We are kept abreast of things and involved in [person’s] care.”

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and support 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. Staff had access to a wide range of policies to support them to follow best practice. The provider had implemented staff champion roles for specific areas of people’s care such as safeguarding, infection prevention and control and promoting dignity. Staff champions were given clearly defined responsibilities including sharing updates and feedback with the rest of the staff team to promote learning.

Staff supported people appropriately with their eating and drinking needs. The chef was aware of people’s needs and preferences and adapted the menu as required. People told us they were asked for their feedback on menu options. One person told us, “The chef knows that I have small portions, it’s my choice, they know my likes and dislikes, we’re given 2 options but I can have egg and chips, I do try the options.”

The provider worked in partnership with other healthcare professionals to promote consistency in people’s care when supporting them to access different health and community services.

Staff worked collaboratively with other professionals to ensure people’s needs were met. Comments from health professionals included, “We have made suggestions to the care home and find the home have responded to these and put into practice all suggestions we have made” and “Previously I really struggled with communication, action and support for the patients. Now I am finding senior staff are present and supportive. Previously I have struggled to get anyone to join me for my visits, now they will make themselves available or if unable ensure a senior carer is present.”

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’s care plans contained information about the health professionals involved in their care and people’s care notes evidenced regular input from a range of different health and social care professionals. People and their relatives told us staff promoted health and wellbeing. Comments included, “[Person’s] health has got much better”, “[Person] gets all the help and services needed” and “The doctor comes, the dentist has been and the chiropodist comers regularly.”

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and support to continuously improve it. They ensured people’s outcomes were positive and consistent, and met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

Since our last inspection, the management team had carried out in depth analysis to understand how to improve people’s health outcomes. This led to them identifying and addressing previously undiagnosed health issues and putting in place management strategies to monitor and improve people’s health and wellbeing. The management team met regularly with the clinical staff to discuss people’s health needs and reviewed the management plans in place to ensure they continued to meet people’s needs.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and support. We observed staff asking people for their consent prior to providing care. However, people’s care records did not always provide detailed information about how to support their decision-making.

Where people may not have the capacity to make a specific decision, the provider had followed the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to assess people’s capacity. However, not all of the capacity assessments we reviewed detailed how the decision had been made. Following our feedback, the provider confirmed they would review all capacity documentation to ensure relevant details were included.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The provider had made appropriate DoLS applications where necessary. Staff had access to information relating to people’s DoLS and mental capacity included in their handover information sheets for easy reference.