Plane Tree 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

People’s needs were assessed and reviewed. People’s care plans were overall reflective of their needs. However, some care plans lacked detail and personalised information about the person receiving support.

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.

People’s needs were assessed. One relative told us,” We had an initial consultation to discuss my loved one’s needs.”

However, people we spoke to were mostly not aware of discussions around their care needs and preferences. One person told us, “I don’t recall any discussions about care planning.” There was evidence that people’s care plans were periodically reviewed. However, these have not always been detailed and person centred. Care and support provided to people was recorded in care notes. However, notes were mainly task-based, and did not always record people’s choices and their preferences. We also found some discrepancies in care records completed by staff, and we told the provider about this.

We also saw that some people had to wait longer to have their meals and to receive the help they needed. We told the registered manager about our findings who following our feedback conducted nutritional and hydration review for a sample of people, engaging with the GP in this review.

People told us they felt they have not always been involved in their care planning. However, people told us that carers understood their needs and would respond to them. One person told us, “They[staff]are understanding and caring, and they understand my needs.”

People’s care needs were reviewed periodically. One relative told us, “We do have regular follow up, check in with manager.” People’s care plans covered a number of areas regarding people’s needs and support required.

People’s nutrition and hydration needs were not always met. For example, we observed people did not always have access to drinks and we observed that some people had low fluid intake recorded in the evidence provided.

We also saw that some people had to wait longer to have their meals and to receive the help they needed. We told the registered manager about our findings who following our feedback conducted a nutritional and hydration review for a sample of people, engaging with the GP in this review.

Staff worked together well to ensure people received good care. One person told us, “Whenever I needed to speak to a nurse they were there. “One staff member told us, “We have great team, and we will all work together.”

Staff told us they felt supported in their roles, and they could speak up and raise their concerns when needed. One staff member told us, “I would go and speak to the manager. They are very approachable.” Another staff member told us, “I did raise concern about a colleague who didn’t want to follow policy. I would always speak up.” Staff told us they work with other agencies and stakeholders to support people. One professional told us, “I have found working with Plane Tree Court to be a positive experience, and I have received equally positive feedback from those in their care.”

People were overall supported to make healthy choices. There was choice of food available to people considering their individual preferences. People were provided with opportunities to attend physical activities such as chair exercises. However, we observed not all of people were supported to access organised activities. For example, people with limited mobility were receiving less interactions from staff than people who were mobile and able to express their needs and wishes. One person told us, “I don’t join with many activities, but I do like bingo.”

People were overall supported in a person-centred way. One person told us, “All the staff are good, caring and they understand my needs.” Another person told us, “They are very caring here.” One relative told us, “My loved one does not want to go to hospital and staff respects this.”

People’s care needs were routinely monitored and reviewed. One relative told us,” My loved one’s care plan is going to be reviewed.” People received support from relevant professionals when required. One person told us, “Staff are professional and on the ball with medications and hospital appointments.” One relative told us: “My loved one was losing weight and they got SALT(Speech and Language Therapist) involved and as a result they have now put on weight.”

The provider worked with a number of different professionals and stakeholders to support outcomes for people. One professional told us, “I’ve found the care home staff to be knowledgeable and caring. They are quickly responding to changes, and they raise concerns about poorly patients in a timely manner.”

People’s consent to care was sought by staff when providing support to people. One person told us, “They don’t rush me; staff give me plenty of time.” Staff had a good understanding of the importance of obtaining people’s consent and knew when to do so.” I would ask resident’s permission before doing anything. If they can’t say it sometimes their eyes and body would tell me.”

People’s consent had not always been detailed in people’s care plans. The provider worked within the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act and had good understanding regarding this. However, people’s care plans did not always contain information regarding people’s mental capacity and the impact it had on their care. We told the provider about this, and they were going to take action to address this.

Staff had overall good understanding regarding MCA and they received relevant training regarding this.