Normanhurst 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 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Although 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 records did not always reflect these assessed needs.

Assessments were completed before people started using the service. This helped to ensure people received the support they both needed and chose. One person said, “They went through all my care planning and talked about how my care would be delivered."

Care plans and risk assessments were developed to reflect the required care and support. This was reviewed regularly to ensure it continued to meet the person’s needs. We identified that although people’s needs were reviewed and reassessed, the care plans and risk assessments did not include all the relevant information staff may need. However, staff knew people well and provided the care and support people needed and chose.

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.

Records showed the use of nationally recognised tools for assessing people’s risk of malnutrition, the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) for monitoring people’s weight. Risk assessments were in place to help identify people at risk of pressure damage. Although care plans and risk assessments did not always reflect people’s needs, staff knew people well and understood the care and support they required and told us how they provided this.

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 told us they worked together as a team, and with other professionals, to ensure people received the care and support they needed. All staff said the team was a “good staff team.” They were updated at handover at the start of each shift about people’s care and support needs for the shift, any checks or observations that were required, for example blood pressure checks. Staff shared information with each other throughout the day to ensure they were updated about people’s needs.

There was a meeting each morning for heads of department to update colleagues and identify any areas of concern or where support may be required. This meeting included staff from the sister home situated next door to ensure information was shared. Staff told us these meetings were useful giving them an oversight of what was happening across the homes.

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 had a good understanding of people’s health needs and when to contact the relevant health professionals. People attended regular health appointments related to their specific needs. Daily records included details of health checks and observations that each person required.

The registered manager and staff had a good working relationship with health and social care professionals. There was regular contact with the GP surgery which included weekly calls and fortnightly visits to discuss people’s health concerns. When people experienced any changes in health then staff contacted the GP or other relevant healthcare professional for advice. One healthcare professional told us staff were proactive in updating them in any changes or concerns related to people they supported.

Records and observations showed that health professionals were contacted when required. One person told us, "I have not needed a doctor, but I speak to person in charge and they would arrange it if it was needed.”

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.

Relatives told us about the improvements people had made since moving into the home. One relative said, “[Relative] has come on so much since they have been here, she wasn’t walking when they first came here but is now.” Staff told us about one person whose mobility had improved. They told us they were contacting the relevant professional to arrange a reassessment and ensure they were receiving the appropriate support.

Where required staff monitored people’s health and recorded people’s vital signs, such as blood pressure and blood sugar levels and submitted these readings to the most relevant healthcare professional. This helped to quickly identify changes in people’s health or when people may be becoming unwell. This meant treatment was sought and received earlier and could help prevent unnecessary hospital admissions.

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

Despite the concerns identified in safe staff spoke knowledgeably about capacity and consent. People told us they could make their own decisions and choices. One person said, "I can go out but choose not to.” Staff told us how they offered people choices and supported them to make their own when they were having difficulties. One staff member gave an example that if a person declined a wash, they would respect that and return later to check if they had changed their mind. Throughout the inspection we observed staff asking people’s consent before they provided any support.