Ashton Manor 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.

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.

People were assessed prior to moving into Ashton Manor to check the service was a suitable place for them to live and their needs could be met. Care plans were developed from the initial enquiry stage when the details were gathered. The registered manager told us, “Once we’ve done the assessment, we generally start to do the risk assessments, then we can create the care plan. Usually within 48 hours they will have a fully created care plan. There are certain mandatory fields that definitely have to be completed.”

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.

Staff used nationally recognised assessment to monitor people’s health. This included ‘MUST’ – a malnutrition risk assessment, ‘waterlow’ for pressure ulcer risk, a pain assessment and a falls risk assessment. These were reviewed regularly for any changes or actions required, such as a referral to a healthcare professional.

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.

The service worked extremely well with the local GP practice who carried out regular visits. This helped ensure people had access to healthcare input when they needed it. The registered manager told us, “The GP is really good with the residents. We also have access to the community matron and our clinical lead can send through people’s observations on a daily basis and they will phone us back.” A relative commented, “The medical care is exemplary with nurses always on hand and regular visits from their own allocated GP.”

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.

People received sufficient food and drink to help maintain their health. Healthcare professionals felt staff were good at monitoring people’s health. One told us, “They (staff) escalate if needed to and they do this appropriately, or they’ll call 111. They pick up on things before they become a problem. Communication is good and they will flag anything concerning to me.” A staff member said, “We work closely with the nurses, GPs and families to make sure everyone is on the same page. It’s about doing what’s best for each person.”

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.

The registered manager and staff worked with people to help ensure they had a positive experience while living at Ashton Manor. One person arrived feeling distressed and anxious. In response, staff provided one-to-one support and arranged for the community mental health team to be involved who organised a complete review of their medication. All actions meant the person became more settled and less anxious. Another person was being supported by staff and external professionals to return home and a further person, who initially had a negative perception of care homes, wrote a story to staff when they left as their view had completely changed.

Healthcare professionals felt staff were competent in their roles. One told us, “Some people are malnourished (due to age and health) so become prone to skin damage, but it’s not really an issue because the wound care is really good.” A relative felt their family member had benefitted from living at the service. They told us, “[Family member] loves the food and particularly enjoys the garden. He has favourites amongst the staff, especially [staff name] who can get him to laugh and dance.”

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. They understood the need to assess a person’s capacity and make a best interests decisions in the event of any restrictions.

The principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were followed as we found assessments and best interests decisions were in place. This included for living in a locked environment, having bed rails in place or a sensor mat in their room. Staff had involved family and professionals where necessary to help ensure they were choosing the least restrictive option for the person.

Staff received training in the MCA and told us, “People always have choices”, “They can choose and live their own lives, it’s their own choice.”