Fornham House Residential 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 good. At this inspection 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, well-being and communication needs with them.

Prior to admission, the registered manager or deputy manager completed a comprehensive assessment of each person’s needs, preferences and choices, in partnership with them and, where appropriate, their relatives or representatives. This helped ensure the service was able to meet people’s individual needs safely and appropriately before they moved in. The information gathered through these assessments was used to develop care and support plans that reflected what mattered to people and how they wished to be supported. Care plans were kept under regular review and updated in response to changes in people’s needs, circumstances or preferences, helping to ensure care remained effective, person-centred and responsive over time.

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.

Staff used recognised, evidence-based assessment tools to support the effective assessment and ongoing evaluation of people’s care and support needs. These included the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), which was used to identify people who may be at risk of malnutrition or dehydration. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of how to apply these tools accurately and consistently.

Outcomes from assessments were used to inform care planning and identify when additional monitoring or support was required. Where concerns were identified, staff followed the guidance associated with the assessment tools and took appropriate action, including making timely referrals to external healthcare professionals, such as dietitians. This helped ensure people received specialist advice and support when needed, and that risks to their health and well-being were managed effectively.

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.

There was a clear and collaborative approach to supporting people’s care needs. Staff communicated effectively with a range of internal colleagues and external professionals to ensure people received coordinated and consistent care. Referrals to external health and social care professionals were made promptly when additional support or specialist input was required, and care records and staff observations demonstrated that professional guidance and recommendations were followed in practice.

Systems were in place to ensure information about people was shared appropriately with relevant external health and social care organisations when needed. This supported joined‑up working and helped ensure people experienced coordinated care, particularly when their needs changed or when care was delivered across different services.

All staff we spoke with were open, engaged and actively involved in working together to support people. Staff demonstrated good knowledge of the individual needs of people living in the home and spoke respectfully and professionally when discussing people’s care, reflecting a shared commitment to delivering good care.

The provider supported people to manage their health and well-being 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 eat a balanced and nutritious diet that met their individual needs and preferences. Meals were varied and planned to provide appropriate nutrition, with options available to reflect people’s tastes, cultural preferences and dietary requirements. Staff knew people well and offered alternatives when meals were declined, ensuring people were encouraged to eat and enjoy their food without feeling rushed or restricted. A relative told us, “I have booked in and eaten with [family member] ...there is always good choice, and they have offered alternatives when [family member] hasn't wanted a big meal. Eg omelette, beans on toast. I particularly enjoyed seeing that a [person] mentioned they didn't like the sausages, and the [registered] manager arranged for a sausage tasting session so they could choose alternatives. I am aware they also have taste testing of new dishes.”

Another relative said, “[Family member] has a good appetite and I have seen the food, and it looks good quality and [people] seem to enjoy it. They give a weekly menu which family members can see when they come into the building.” A third relative commented, “The chef has to be congratulated, when I have experienced the food, it has been varied, nutritious and tasty.”

We observed the lunchtime meal. There was a pleasant and unrushed atmosphere throughout the meal, which contributed to a positive dining experience for people. We observed carers engaging with people who were dining, taking time to chat, offer reassurance and provide support in a respectful and dignified way.

People were referred to medical and nursing professionals when advice was needed. This ensured people’s ongoing health needs were monitored and addressed promptly.

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.

Staff demonstrated an understanding of people’s individual needs and how to promote their health and well-being in their day-to-day care. Where people became unwell or experienced changes in their health, staff and management increased monitoring to ensure timely access to medical support when required. Relatives spoke positively about how health concerns were managed. One relative told us,“The doctor visits once a week. They are concerned with [person’s] health and his wellness.”

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

Staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and demonstrated this in their day‑to‑day practice. Staff demonstrated an understanding of the presumption of capacity and the importance of supporting people to make their own decisions wherever possible.

Where people lacked the capacity to make specific decisions best interest decisions were made in line with the MCA, with consideration given to people’s past and present wishes and involving relatives or relevant professionals as appropriate. Where restrictions were required to keep people safe, these were the least restrictive options available and were appropriately authorised through DoLS applications to the local authority when required. This demonstrated that people’s rights were protected while ensuring their safety and well-being.