Frith House

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 needs were assessed and reviewed so their care reflected their health, wellbeing and communication needs. People had comprehensive, person-centred assessments and care plans that reflected their individual histories, preferences and risks. Records showed assessments for nutrition, hydration, falls, skin integrity, oral health and mental health were completed and regularly reviewed using recognised tools. Mental capacity assessments were clearly documented where people lacked capacity for specific decisions, and care plans showed how staff supported people to make day-to-day choices wherever possible.

We saw care plans clearly described how people wished to be supported and how risks were managed in the least restrictive way. One member of staff said, “Care plans give us the information we need.”

Reviews were up to date and reflected changes in people’s needs, demonstrating a consistent approach to assessing and reassessing needs. Family members told us they had been involved in the creation and review of care plans.

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 received training and supervision to make sure their practice was always in accordance with up-to-date best practice guidelines and legal requirements.

People were happy with the food provided. One person told us, “You can ask for anything to eat. I believe they make it on the premises. There are choices.” Another person said, “The food and the people are very good.”

We observed lunch in all areas of the home. Food was well presented and people were offered choices. Where people required their meal to be served at a specific consistency to minimise the risk of choking a suitable meal was provided. Staff balanced clinical safety with people’s preferences. Where inconsistencies were identified during the assessment with meal consistency, the provider acted promptly to review professional advice, align documentation and reinforce practice. Care plans were treated as the single source of correct information, with care and kitchen staff working from the same, standardised information. We saw clear evidence of learning and improvement, including updated kitchen information, staff briefings and competency checks, which helped ensure care was delivered consistently and in line with guidance.

The provider made sure staff, teams and services worked effectively together to deliver joined-up care. There were clear systems to support multidisciplinary working, with staff working alongside GPs, district nurses, mental health teams, speech and language therapists and social care professionals. Information was shared through handovers, meetings and care records so staff across departments understood their roles and responsibilities. We saw evidence of coordinated responses to changes in people’s health, including timely referrals and shared decision-making with professionals and families. Governance records showed learning from incidents and complaints was shared across teams, supporting consistent and joined-up care.

All staff told us they worked together as a team and thought there was excellent communication within the home.

The provider supported people to live healthier lives by promoting wellbeing and responding to their health needs. People were supported to maintain their physical and mental health through regular monitoring of nutrition, hydration and mobility, and through prompt responses to health concerns such as infections. Records showed timely involvement of health professionals when concerns were identified, and staff demonstrated an understanding of the importance of promoting overall wellbeing as part of everyday care.

People told us they were happy with healthcare support provided. One person said they saw a district nurse regularly and another person said, “They have a doctor visit, and you can see them if you need to.”

Staff encouraged people to remain as independent as possible and supported them to take part in activities that mattered to them, including social events, faith services and meaningful daily routines. Activity staff had received training in providing gentle exercise classes to help people to stay physically active. In areas of the home which supported people living with dementia, care staff provided social stimulation. This resulted in people appearing engaged and happy.

The provider monitored outcomes and used learning to improve the quality and safety of care. There were effective governance systems to review incidents, accidents, complaints and compliments. The provider analysed trends, such as falls and infections, and took action to reduce risks to people. Audits, spot checks and walkarounds were used to monitor practice and staff competency, with actions recorded and followed up. We saw examples where learning led to improvements in care planning, staff guidance and monitoring arrangements, showing the provider used information effectively to improve outcomes for people.

People and their families were happy with the care and support they received. One visiting relative told us, “We would recommend the home.” Another visitor said about their relative, “They seem happy, not stressed, calm, content and well looked after."

The provider made sure care and support was delivered with people’s consent and in line with the MCA. People told us they only received care and support with their consent. People said they made choices about what they did. One person commented, “No one pushes you around. Just ask and you can do what you like. And don’t have to do things you don’t like.”

Care records showed clear consideration of people’s capacity to make decisions. Where people lacked capacity for specific decisions, mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions were recorded, and DoLS authorisations were in place where required. Staff supported people to make everyday choices about their care, routines and preferences. We observed staff applying MCA principles in practice and respecting people’s wishes while managing risks. Records showed consent and capacity were kept under review, demonstrating a consistent and lawful approach.