Edgewater

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 was the first inspection 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 71 (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. Before moving to the service, a pre-assessment was carried out by the registered manager or senior member of staff. These covered risks to people and their needs were assessed to ensure the provider had the right staff with the right skills to be able to support them. The notes from these meetings went on to form the basis of care plans when people moved into the service. Some care plans contained extensive information and could be difficult for staff to read and take all the information in however, the registered manager was aware of this and supported staff with any additional needs or information they required for supporting people at Edgewater.

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 we spoke with knew people well. Overall, this resulted in positive outcomes for people as staff were able to detect any changes in people’s needs. Despite this there were gaps in some people’s care plans which required improvements.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. We saw they worked in partnership with various community-based health and social care professionals and agencies including, GPs, district nurses and social workers. We saw recorded evidence of guidance external health care professionals had provided staff to follow. One persons loved one said, “Edgewater is calm and relaxed. Whenever anything changes or [name] has to see a doctor or go to an appointment I am informed well in advance, and this is one of the reasons this is the best place [name] has been and is more settled.”

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 and relatives told us the care received from staff met their needs. Staff demonstrated they understood how to deliver evidence-based care and treatment. Staff were able to explain what was important to people and supported people in line with best practice standards.

The provider did not always routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. The care plans recording peoples preferences around how their care and treatment options are delivered was not always detailed or individualised and, in some instances, did not reflect the care recorded and monitored. Blood test results was not always completed accurately and therefore not fully reflective of peoples up to date needs fully. This would make monitoring outcomes not always accurate.

The staff we spoke with told us they were committed to providing person centred care and support. Staff told us they had time to spend with people on an individual basis, and we observed this during the assessment and safe administration of medicines.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Staff had received training in mental capacity and consent. All staff we spoke with described how they ensured people were able to make choices and how they supported people who were unable to make decisions due to their cognitive impairment. We observed staff asking people for their consent. For example, we observed staff used people’s names and ask them what they would like to do. People told us staff were good at understanding their needs. One person said, “I am the representative, and I tell [manager] any problems or anything we would like to do. If I have any problems or anyone else does the staff listen to us.”