Glen Arun 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.

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 care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Care plans demonstrated that people's needs were assessed before they were admitted to the service. This ensured their needs were safely met. Staff told us, “The care plans are up to date.” People, and their relatives were appropriate, had been involved in the shaping of their own care to ensure it was personalised to them; their likes and dislikes were clearly documented. Staff knew people well and confirmed that they were given time to read care plans to ensure the care they gave was in line with people’s needs. Staff used recognised tools to assess the risk of malnutrition, weight loss and skin breakdown.

People told us they were happy with the care and care was delivered in line with their preferences. Comments from people included, “[I am] happy here.” Relatives gave positive feedback including, “The care is very good,” and, “It’s a nice care home.”

Care plans were regularly reviewed and audited by the deputy manager or senior staff to ensure they remained up to date and relevant to the person receiving care.

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.

There were processes in place to ensure people’s care plans were regularly reviewed. Staff followed best practice guidelines and used recognised tools to assess and monitor people’s health. This included the use of the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool [MUST]to monitor nutrition and hydration; and Waterlow to monitor risk to skin integrity to ensure care was delivered in an evidence-based manner. The provider ensured staff received training in the appropriate legislative areas, such as the Mental Capacity Act 2005. This enabled staff to support people in the least restrictive way and where necessary in their best interests.

Staff knew people well. People had their health monitored to help ensure staff would be quickly aware if there was any decline in people's health which might necessitate a change in how their care was delivered. This helped ensure there was a consistent approach between different staff which meant people's needs were met in line with their care plans.

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.

Staff felt they had enough time to meet people’s needs. They told us how any changes to people’s needs were communicated promptly. There was a staff handover meeting for senior staff at each shift change, the content of which was then shared with the relevant staff teams. This gave staff time to exchange information. Staff spoke of, “Good communication between day and night staff” and, “Good teamwork.” Communication books were regularly used to enable staff to ‘catch-up’ on any events or changes that occurred whilst they were not working.

The deputy manager had good oversight of people’s care needs and how staff worked together with other services to ensure these were effectively met. This included when people were supported between services, for example, admission or discharge from hospital.

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.

Staff sought support from external professionals, when needed, to promote people’s health and well-being.This included supporting people to access the GPs, dentists, opticians, and community matrons when needed. Staff told us that they would be comfortable to contact external agencies. when needed. Care records contained details of multiple professional’s visits and care plans were updated when advice and guidance was given. For example, when people had an assessment by a speech and language therapist [SaLT ] and specific dietary requirements were recorded and followed by staff. Risk assessments were in place to minimise deterioration of health and allowed staff to spot when someone may need some additional support. The provider had in place a full activity schedule for people to get involved with to promote good physical and mental health.

People told us they were happy with the food. They told us there was a choice of food. One person said, “All the food is well prepared and well cooked.” They also said, “Everyone eats cakes, this is usual. We are offered teas and coffees.”

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.

Staff monitored people’s health and wellbeing. Staff were clear in the actions they would take if people were unwell. Monitoring tools and records were kept for the monitoring of food and fluid intake, medical conditions, weight and skin conditions amongst others. Staff were alerted by the electronic care plan system when there were changes in people’s care needs to ensure staff took appropriate actions to address them. Staff recorded care interventions, and the senior and nursing team monitored records to ensure care was provided appropriately and safely. The deputy manager had a system in place to manage and report on incidents and complaints in order to improve outcomes for people.

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

Conversation with staff and our observations confirmed staff had an understanding about consent and put this into practice by taking time to establish what people’s wishes were. We saw people made their own decisions and staff respected their choices. People told us they were involved in shaping their care and making decisions around this. Staff followed people's documented wishes. People's right to decline care was understood. People told us they were not restricted. They told us that had choice about how they spent their time and they were able to participate in communal activities or remain in their rooms if they preferred. One person described how they made choices including, “I choose my own clothes.”

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. Decisions around these were made in people’s best interests and for their safety.