Cartmel Grange

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. Atour last assessment of this key question, 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 79 (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.

People and their relatives told us they had been involved in their care planning. One person told us, “My care plan was put together by myself and my family.” A relative said, “We have meetings about my relative on a regular basis and we discuss any change that are needed.” We saw that care plans were regularly reviewed and involved the relevant people. People’s differing communications needs had been appropriately recorded. A variety of clinical assessments tools were used to assess and understand people’s needs.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. People received care, treatment and support that was evidence-based and in line with good practice standards.

People told us they felt staff knew their needs well and supported them in the right way. However, where people required a modified diet records seen were not always sufficiently detailed, and we were not fully reassured that all staff competencies were adequate in understanding them. This was immediately investigated by the registered manager and staff supervisions were conducted. Where further training needs were identified this was arranged. We saw people were appropriately supported with eating and drinking where they needed it. Feedback about the food choices and quality were all positive and demonstrated that the kitchen staff knew people’s individual dietary needs.

The provider always worked well across teams and services to support people. They shared thorough assessments of people’s needs when they moved between different services, so people only needed to tell their story once, such as on admission to hospital.

Care records were electronic, and these were accessible to staff in live time with current information. We observed regular handover of information at each shift change. Meetings were held regularly for sharing information. Weekly clinical reviews of care were held with the GP and or practice staff.

The provider and registered manager made specific arrangements for one person to be regularly supported by another care provider to facilitate home visits to their spouse. This showed exceptional effective working together with another provider to ensure people could maintain important relationships to them.

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 were fully supported in making choices about their own health needs. People were supported to access a variety of external health professionals such as the dentist, optician and podiatrist as they needed to. One person told us, “If I need an appointment for anything I don’t need to worry, the home will make the arrangements for me.”

The management team 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.

People experienced very positive outcomes. Regular reviews were completed where people’s outcomes were reassessed. People told us their independence was actively promoted and supported by the staff in a safe manner. A relative told us, “The staff always encourage my relative to do thing I couldn’t get them to do. They treat them with so much kindness. They are patient with them and don’t rush them.” Another person said, “We have lovely gardens here and I enjoy being outside and staff help me to do this.”

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People’s needs and wishes were upheld.

We observed and people told us staff knew them well. Consent had been obtained in line with the MCA. Relatives who had legal responsibility for their relatives told us they were fully involved and kept up to date. We observed staff being courteous and respectful when asking people to do things. One person told us, “My daily activities are up to me, what I wear, what I eat is my decision.” Another person said,” If I need help with day-to-day life the staff will help me with advice and encouragement.” A relative told us, “The home do ask me if the way my wife is cared for is okay.”