Riverlee Residential and Nursing 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.

People’s needs, risks and choices were assessed and planned for. Relatives told us they were involved in assessing and planning for their loved one’s care and support needs. One relative told us, “I had a lot of discussion about the care my loved one needed and that is how the one-to-one care was decided upon.” Another relative said, “I filled in a lot of forms, and we had a meeting as well to discuss my loved one’s needs and preferences.”

Completed assessments were used to help create care plans which outlined people’s care and support needs, preferences and wishes and the support required by staff. Care plans were regularly reviewed to reflect any changes in people’s needs, wishes and health conditions. Care plans and assessments included information about people's histories, communication needs and how they wanted to be supported.

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 told us, “The food is good, and the staff make sure everyone is eating.” Comments from relatives included, “My loved one needs support to eat but mostly they enjoy the food, the other day they had burger and chips followed by lemon meringue pie, and there was a lot of licking of lips and mms”, and “My loved one can go to the dining area alone and they love the food.”

We observed how people were supported at lunch time in the dining areas and other parts of the service. Where people required support from staff to eat their meals safely, we observed that support was provided appropriately and with dignity. The food appeared to be well received, and people told us they enjoyed the meals provided. Family members told us they had been offered food during their visits, which they appreciated.

The chef and kitchen staff were knowledgeable about people’s dietary and cultural needs and daily menus offered choice. They showed us information about people’s individual dietary needs, these recorded where people had meals that met their medical or cultural and religious needs. We also saw an information board detailing the names of people that required modified textured diets where they were at risk of choking. The chef told us they received feedback and updates from care and nursing staff about meals, people’s changing needs and risks, and any new clinical recommendations made for people.

There were systems in place to ensure and support better staff communication. Regular meetings were held including daily 10 at 11 meetings where information was shared across the staffing team.

We saw staff communicated effectively with other professionals. These included the local authority, regular GP visits to liaise with nursing staff, tissue viability nurses, community mental health teams and palliative care teams amongst others.

People were supported with their health needs. People told us they had access to health care professional when required. A relative told us a physiotherapist saw their loved one this week and they took action to help them. Another relative said staff had arranged all their loved one’s appointments when needed and they had consulted with them.

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 referrals when people required medical healthcare and treatment and when staff needed advice and information for changes in people’s conditions.

There was a positive learning culture within the service, and managers and staff communicated effectively to help drive improvements. The provider had effective systems for reporting and learning from incidents. When incidents occurred, investigations were conducted, and appropriate actions were taken to prevent recurrence. Records showed that management held regular staff meetings to help ensure any learning from events was shared and implemented. We also saw that ‘behaviour sessions’ were held with staff to develop and improve practice.

There were policies and procedures in place for responding to incidents, accidents and complaints and staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about these. A staff member commented, “I am aware of all the policies and feel confident on how to respond. Management support is very good.”

People were asked to consent to their care and treatment. People told us staff were respectful and always sought their consent. Comments included, “I’m involved as far as possible. If there are big decisions to be made, they [staff] always seek my consent as well as my [loved one]”, and “They [staff] always ask for my consent.”

When people lacked the mental capacity to make decisions, staff 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).