Manley Court 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.

People using the service were receiving effective care and treatment.

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.

Staff made sure people’s care and treatment were effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. Assessments were used to create care plans which outlined people’s care and support needs and provided guidance for staff on how best to support people. People and their relatives were supported to take an active role in planning and reviewing their care. Assessments and care plans were comprehensive and contained details about people’s wishes, cultural needs and what was important to them. Reviews were carried out regularly to ensure care plans remained up to date, especially when there were changes in people’s circumstances.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important to them. They used assessment and monitoring tools to support the delivery of care in line with recognised guidance. These included the multi-universal screening tool (MUST) used to identify adults, who were malnourished and at risk of malnutrition and the Waterlow tool used to evaluate people’s likelihood of developing pressure ulcers.These tools were actively used and embedded within the care planning system to help guide staff in delivering safe and effective care.

People's nutrition, hydration, preferences, and cultural needs were met. People and their relatives told us they enjoyed the food and menus on offer. A person using the service told us, “They do so much cultural food here, it’s amazing.” A relative commented, “My loved one really likes the food and can manage without help.” Another relative told us, “My loved one needs help with their pureed food, and the staff help them with fluids, I help my loved one in the evening.”

The chef and kitchen staff were knowledgeable about people’s nutritional, dietary and cultural needs and daily menus offered choice. The chef showed us up to date information held about each person’s dietary needs; this included details such as food texture and consistency and any food allergies. The manager told us people chose what meals they wanted to eat each day from pictorial food options. The chef had changed the menu to remove fancy names following feedback from people who wanted the menu to make what was on offer more relatable.

We observed how people were supported at lunch time. The atmosphere in dining areas was relaxed, and staff were attentive to people’s needs. People were offered sample plates to choose from. Where people required support from staff to eat their meals safely, we observed that support was provided appropriately and with dignity. People were provided with meals appropriate to their specific dietary needs such as soft, pureed or low sugar meals suitable for diabetics. We observed that staff followed guidance from health care professionals such as dieticians when supporting people at mealtimes.

Staff worked effectively with health and social care professionals to ensure people received appropriate support when meeting their physical and mental health needs. These included GP’s and tissue viability nurses amongst others. A person using the service told us, “They flag things with my GP, they act quickly.” A relative told us, “The home has a whole raft of professionals that people can see, and it is all arranged for them.”

A visiting social care professional told us their experiences at the service had been positive. They said staff were knowledgeable, approachable, and consistently demonstrated professionalism in their work. Staff communicated clearly with them and followed any instructions they provided. They were confident in the quality of care provided at the service and had no concerns regarding the support offered to people using the service.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. People’s health needs were assessed and care plans documented how best people should be supported. Staff monitored people’s conditions and acted if people became unwell. We saw staff made timely referrals when people required medical healthcare and treatment and when staff needed advice and information for changes in people’s conditions.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. Monitoring tools and records were kept for the monitoring of food and fluid intake, medical conditions, weight and skin conditions amongst others. Care records showed people were supported by health care professionals such as speech and language therapists, dietitians, tissue viability nurses and a local hospice.

The manager told us the service worked closely with the local authorities care home intervention team (CHIT) and a local hospice. The CHIT provided support with care planning and training for staff on supporting people with specific care and support needs. They told us the CHIT would attend the service and watch how a person was being supported and develop a care plan for staff to follow that was centred to the person’s needs. The local hospice regularly tended to people at the service and had trained nurses and senior staff team on end-of-life care.

A member of the CHIT told us staff were knowledgeable about people’s physical care and support needs. For example, they were good at screening people for UTIs (urinary tract infections) before they were referred to CHIT and they referred people to different agencies for extra support such occupational therapists, physio therapist and speech and language therapists.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these. People told us staff were respectful and always sought their consent.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control over their daily lives. When people lacked the mental capacity to make decisions, the provider met with relatives where appropriate to ensure any decisions made, were in the person’s best interests. Staff promoted people's rights and worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The MCA provides a legal framework for making decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. The provider had requested legal authorisations where restrictions were in place. Any conditions in place were reviewed by staff and met.