White Gables 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

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. This is the first assessment for this service under this provider. This key question has been rated 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, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Throughout our visits we saw people’s needs had been properly assessed when they were admitted to the service and there were ongoing reviews to ensure the information in people’s care plans continued to reflect people’s needs. There was clear information on people’s communication needs and how staff should support them.

When they wished to be, people and relatives were involved in reviewing and contributing to people’s care plans. One relative said, “Yes I am involved in care plan reviews and always get notified so I can attend (review meetings).”

Staff told us the nurses and senior care workers reviewed and wrote people’s care plans, but they listened to other staff feedback about people’s needs and made sure the plans reflected everyone’s contributions. One senior carer said, “If a person is coming from the hospital we will use that information, (when formulating their care plans) and we involve people and their relatives, if the GP has information we will use this. We are informed at each handover (of any changes to people’s needs) and can read the plans on the electronic system.”

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.

People’s records showed nationally recognised assessment tools had been used to assess their needs in areas such as weight management and risk of skin damage. These tools had been regularly updated and reflected people’s needs. Where the assessment tools showed people needed increased care we saw measures were in place, such as people at risk of skin pressure damage, they had appropriate aids in place and were regularly repositioned by staff. Throughout our visits we saw staff supporting people in line with the information in their care plan. As reported above, people and their relatives were involved in planning their care. One care plan we viewed showed how relatives had been involved in supporting a person who had numerus health issues which caused them anxiety. The staff and family had worked together to make sure the person received care in the way they wanted it and reduced their anxiety on a day-to-day basis.

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 feedback from relatives and staff to show they felt there was good team working, both at the service, and with external health professionals. One relative said, “Staff are well trained, confident and professional.”

Staff were positive about how the staff team worked together. One staff member said, “Yes (we) always listen and support each other, and the communication is good. We have good relationships with the GP and District Nurse and we make sure they have good information about people so they get the right care.”

There was also evidence to show the staff worked well with GP’s, community nurses, dentists and opticians to support people. We saw how referrals to relevant health professionals had been undertaken and their guidance followed by staff. One health professional told us they had a good relationship with staff at the service and the staff were quick to alert them if they had any concerns about people’s health.

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.

Throughout the visits we saw the staff at the service worked with people to manage their health and wellbeing. This included examples of supporting people with healthy diets and as reported in the safe key question, making sure people got the medicines they needed to maintain their health. Throughout the service people had access to drinks to keep themselves hydrated and staff knew who needed encouragement to eat and drink and what support they needed. One relative said, “Staff monitor [Name’s] food intake as it is not very good and they can get him to eat more than he did.”

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.

As mentioned above there was clear evidence to show how staff worked with people, their relatives and health professionals to monitor and improve people’s care. Staff told us there was good communication at handovers about monitoring people should there be any changes in their health needs. We saw there was regular reviews of people’s care plans to ensure they reflected any changes to people’s health needs.

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

People we spoke with told us staff always asked for consent before they gave care. People made their own choices about their day-to-day care needs, where they wanted to spend their time or who they wanted to sit with. One person said, “I don’t need to be asked about choices as I always make my own.”

Staff were able to give examples of how they supported people who lacked capacity or had communication issues. Staff told us they knew people and could read people’s body language or facial expressions and this helped them to know if people were happy to receive care. Throughout our visits we saw a number of examples which showed staff’s knowledge of people and how to support them.

We saw in people’s care plans where they had been asked permission to share their information with health professionals when needed and to consent to photography.