Crawford 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 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. Assessments were comprehensive and person-centred, focusing on strengths and promoting independence. Staff understood people’s communication needs and escalated changes promptly. For example, communication assessments included non-verbal indicators of distress, such as noting when a person appeared grey or clammy as a sign of pain. Health needs were proactively addressed, with staff advocating for timely GP and specialist input. A health professional told us, “On each occasion I have found people well cared for and happy with their placements and to have a good rapport with the staff.”

Assessments reflected people’s identity and aspirations, with one-page profiles used to match staff skills and interests to individuals. Family members were aware of people’s care plans and said they had been able to contribute to them. This helped to make sure people’s care plans were truly reflective of people’s needs and preferences which enabled staff to provide individual care and support.

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. Staff demonstrated a very strong awareness of national guidance and best practice, including STOMP principles to reduce unnecessary psychotropic medication. For example, one person’s medication was significantly reduced through consistent PBS planning and partnership working, improving physical health and engagement in daily life. The registered manager and staff embodied positive behavioural support (PBS) throughout, which ensured care delivery promoted least restrictive practice and positive risk-taking, supporting autonomy and dignity. One staff member told us, “Everything we do is PBS.” Family members confirmed the impact this had on their loved one’s quality of life, “They promote their [people’s] independence as best they can and encourage them all the time.”
Staff received training to make sure their practice was in accordance with up-to-date best practice guidelines and legislation. The staff used recognised assessment tools to assess people’s healthcare needs.

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 worked collaboratively with health professionals and other services to maintain continuity of care. The registered manager and staff completed various documents to support people to tell their story, these included hospital passports and reasonable adjustment documents. These were detailed and shared with health partners to support people when attending appointments. Staff liaised effectively with multidisciplinary teams, including speech and language therapists, dentists, and behavioural support teams.

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 promoted autonomy in health decisions, such as enabling people to attend flu vaccination appointments at local pharmacies rather than in-house clinics. Health facilitation included tailored plans for chronic conditions, such as constipation and diabetes and proactive referrals to specialists. Staff used tools like active support to promote oral health through modelling techniques. Active Support is an evidence‑based approach to supporting people which enables participation, independence, and meaningful engagement in everyday life, rather than doing tasks for people.

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. The provider consistently monitored outcomes and used feedback to improve care and quality of life. Regular reviews and audits were completed, and feedback from people and relatives informed service improvements. For example, some people had expressed how much they enjoyed listening to carols being sung at Christmas time. Staff liaised with a local school and arranged for people to attend an event put on by the school. This created opportunities for people to engage in meaningful experiences which strengthened social connections with their community. The registered manager told us, “This experience shows how listening to people’s wishes, being flexible, and working in partnership with the local community can create truly meaningful moments.” People were reported to have benefitted from positive outcomes which included improved emotional wellbeing, autonomy, and engagement in community life.

Relatives told us they thought the dedication and commitment of staff and oversight of the registered manager, meant people had positive outcomes. They spoke of how the registered manager and staff were in regular contact and kept them up to date. Records of care confirmed staff monitored peoples care and took prompt action when any changes were noted.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People made their own choices and decisions on a day-to-day basis about what they did, what they ate and how they filled their time. Where people were not able to verbally communicate their choices, the staff used agreed communication techniques to make sure people were able to express their wishes. Our observations confirmed staff respecting people’s choices and decisions. Where people lacked the mental capacity to make decisions for themselves, decisions were made in their best interests in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act. Records were detailed and showed how these decisions had been made and who had been involved.