Eastfield

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 Requires Improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 registered manager made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Although people had not been admitted to the service since our last inspection, the registered manager was able to talk us through their process for assessing a person’s suitability to move into Eastfield. They told us, “Either myself or the deputy will do the initial assessment (on the person).”

Where people went into hospital and were determined medically fit to return to the service, their care plans were reviewed and updated where necessary and risk assessments refreshed to help ensure they covered any new risks identified.

The registered manager planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

People lived in a dementia-friendly environment which had clear signage with symbols and words and contrasting toilet seats in bathrooms. These adjustments promoted independence and helped reduce confusion in people when moving around the service.

Staff worked with healthcare professionals to help ensure people’s care was person-centred and in line with national standards, resulting in effective support that reflected each individual’s needs, preferences, and best practice guidance.

Staff worked well across teams and services to support people. People had the involvement of the GP, dietician, speech and language therapy team and other external professionals to help ensure they had the input they required when they required it. A relative said, “He had (illness). It was treated. They (staff) went with him to the hospital.”

The registered manager said, “The district nurses come in daily to give people their insulin. We have a very good relationship with the doctor’s surgery and the GP does a weekly round. We have a care home co-ordinator who we can call on if we need any support.” A healthcare professional told us they had no issues to raise about the service and said the registered manager was good at making timely referrals if extra support was needed.

Staff 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. One person said, “Sometimes I might be unsteady. Someone helps me and I don’t go to hospital.”

People’s health needs were consistently monitored and assessed. For example, staff recorded some people’s food and fluid intake if they had concerns. Where people were identified as losing weight, referrals were made to the GP or dietician and the frequency of people’s weighing was increased from monthly to weekly. Additional snacks between meals or high-calorie foods were also introduced and encouraged. People were supported to eat their lunch with staff repositioning cutlery in people’s hands so they could eat more comfortably and asking people if they wished their lunch cut up to make it easier for them.” A relative said, “She’s assisted with feeding. She eats and drinks well.”

The registered manager 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.

One person had found moving into Eastfield difficult and as a result had lost weight. Through staff’s consistent input, the person had since put on weight and their well-being had improved. The registered manager told us, “We worked hard to ensure he felt safe and familiar with staff.” They went on to say, “We have had quite a few people move in who have been underweight and we have supported and stabilised their weight to improve their health. Another person has experienced several falls recently and we referred them back to the falls team. We introduced a crash mat (beside their bed) and a sensor mat to help reduce the risk of injury should they fall and to alert staff if they get out of bed.”

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

People’s capacity was assessed and any decisions made in their best interests were done in the least restrictive way possible. We found capacity assessments in place for areas such as medicines, management of finances and personal care, as well as for living at a service which had a locked door.

Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the need to follow its principles. A staff member said, “There are 5 principles. We have to assume capacity and make decisions in people’s best interests, taking the least restrictive option.”