Anglebury Court

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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. 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.

Assessments were completed before care commenced. Staff told us, “The manager or deputy manager visit people and find out their needs and preferences before they are offered a place here.”

Staff had immediate access to information about people’s needs via the provider’s electronic care planning system. Staff told us if there were any changes to people’s assessed needs and support plans, they were kept up to date. Records showed care plans were reviewed regularly and accurately reflected the care people received and were person-centred.

Relatives told us they were involved in reviewing the care and support their loved one received. Staff told us that they felt people’s care plans were accurate and up to date.

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 told us their care needs and personal preferences were discussed with them and carried out by staff who were consistent in their approach, which they considered to be important.

Staff worked closely with specialist professionals to ensure the support provided for people met with nationally recognised good practice standards for needs, such as mobility, mental health and nutrition. People’s nutrition and hydration needs were identified and monitored using aMalnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST). This is used to determine the risk of, and manage risks of malnutrition or obesity. Guidance was in place for staff around modified diets and training was completed in this area.

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.

Care plans included information about people’s health conditions and were updated regularly to reflect their changing needs. The service used an electronic care planning system and staff told us this made information easily accessible.

The provider had ‘Grab sheets’ designed to capture important information to be shared with relevant people in case of an emergency. Staff worked well together and completed handovers to ensure all staff were updated on people’s care and 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.

The service had effective working relationships with a wide range of health and social care professionals whose input was recorded in people’s records and was easily accessed by staff. People told us they were able to see GPs and other health professionals when needed and staff supported them if required. People's nutrition and hydration needs were assessed, and specialist support sought if needed from Speech and Language Therapists.

A relative told us their loved one’s, “Health and fitness have improved hugely since they went to live at Anglebury Court”

Care plans set out people’s health needs and lifestyle choices. Staff knew people very well and were alert to any changes in their well-being and health. If staff had any concerns they sought appropriate professional advice in a timely way.

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.

Records showed people’s support was regularly assessed. Staff monitored people’s physical wellbeing and liaised with other professionals to help ensure people remained physically well. Staff told us people were offered alternatives if they did not like what was on the menu and snacks and drinks are always available. People described the food as being, “good and varied”. They also monitored for any deterioration in people’s mental health and involved other professionals when needed. Care plans recorded changes to people’s needs or personal preferences, and detailed how staff should meet these needs. Staff spoke enthusiastically about supporting people to achieve good outcomes by promoting opportunities and experiences that took account of their diverse needs and preferences.

Staff understood how to ensure people’s rights were fully respected and had received training and supervision to ensure it was happening in practice.

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

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (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 supported to do so when needed. Where a person lacks capacity to make specific decisions, any made on their behalf must be the least restrictive and in their best interests. People’s rights had been upheld, and where people lacked capacity to make specific decisions, mental capacity assessments were carried out in accordance with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. However, we found inconsistencies in the completion of consent and best interest documentation. The management team responded to this immediately to ensure all information was up to date. Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of their responsibilities in supporting people to make informed choices about their care and treatment.

People told us staff asked for their consent before providing the care they needed. Staff demonstrated their understanding of supporting people’s rights around consent. We saw, for example, how they used people’s preferred communication methods to ensure people had the right information to make their choices and decisions. Such as staff needing to use short sentences, avoiding long instructions, breaking down information into simple, direct statements, with clear instructions for staff on how to achieve these outcomes. We observed this happening during our visits.