David Gresham House

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.

People’s needs were assessed prior to moving into the service to help ensure David Gresham House was a suitable place for them to live and that staff could meet their needs. One person told us, “They have information when we come in.”

The registered manager carried out face to face assessments. They told us, “Even if it is for respite we do a face to face assessment. I will take a senior with me because I feel they know so much more about care than I do. They are the ones looking after the person on the floor. I will not accept people who I feel need nursing care or their dementia is too advanced.”

Assessments formed the basis of the persons care plan which was developed and reviewed over time. The registered manager told us, “When someone moves in we say the first couple of weeks are respite as we need to see if they want to stay. We draw up a respite care plan – it’s more of a summary, but with a lot of detail like medication, medical details and the care planning element all condensed. Once we establish the person is going to be permanent, then the care plan is developed into a permanent care plan.”

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 tools to gain an understanding of a person’s needs and risks. This included a MUST tool to check a person’s weight, a FRASE assessment for their falls risk and a Waterlow check list in relation to a person’s skin integrity.

Staff also received training appropriate to the needs of people. One person told us, “Every member of staff has a good knowledge of what I need and the others need. [Specific health condition] is a hard thing, they look after me very well.”

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 were seen communicating with each other throughout the day, ensuring that tasks were completed, people were being looked after and that each other knew if someone was going on their break. This helped to ensure care was provided consistently, and people’s needs continued to be met while staff took their breaks.

The registered manager worked well across all agencies to help support people. They told us, “We use one agency for staff. They are pretty good and it ensures consistency. We also work with health professionals such as the dentist, optician, physiotherapist and dietician. The district nurses will help with wound care if we need it and we have a very good relationship with our GP surgery.

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 told us they were provided with food and fluids in line with their needs. We were told, “If you are hungry you get more. I just ring my bell when I want tea. We get a menu sheet for the week where we can choose”, “Food is very good”, “You do have a choice. You tick what you want each week. If I don’t like the soup they may give me an omelette as an alternative.”

Where people required their food prepared in a certain way this was provided to them and in the event that people had a specific diet or an allergy this was known by the chef and suitable foods were provided for that 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.

People told us staff monitored their health. They said, “They help with my appointments” and “They are always helpful.”

Through staff care and attention people’s wellbeing and health improved. This included 1 person who had been put on end of life care, but was now back to living a fairly normal life. The registered manager told us, “I think it was through consistent care, being brought to the dining room. Receiving consistently good food.”

Other people had moved into the service but wished to go home. Through staff patience, people started to benefit from the social interaction and care and their talk of going home reduced.

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

Staff understood the need to obtain a person’s consent prior to carrying out care and staff confirmed this. People told us, “They are always respectful” and “They always ask.”

Staff completed Mental Capacity Act 2005 training which helped them understand the principles of the Act and relatives said staff were very good at supporting people to make their own decisions. A relative said, “They were very efficient at getting her in there (to the home) and patient whilst she made up her mind if she wanted to stay. When she decided she would, then it was her decision only.”