Middleton Lodge Care 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.

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.

Assessments of people's needs had been carried prior to people using the service and involved the person and, where appropriate, their relatives and healthcare professionals. This ensured the service was able meet the person's needs and preferences. A relative told us, “Yes, we have been very much involved they did it efficiently. The palliative care team have also been involved.”

Care plans and risk assessments had been developed and regularly reviewed to ensure they provided staff with clear guidance on how to safely support people.

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.

The registered manager and staff team knew people well and we saw they had a positive relationship with them. This enabled the staff team to support people in a person-centred way following good practice guidelines. We saw staff supporting individuals as reflected in their assessed needs care plan.

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.

People and relatives told us they were supported to have access to health care professionals such as GP's, and chiropodists when needed. This ensured people were supported to maintain their health and well-being needs.Care records demonstrated when health care professionals had been involved in people’s care.

Our observations showed staff worked well together. People received continuity of care, regular handover meetings took place which ensured staff on shift were updated about people’s health and well-being. A staff member told us, “Communication is effective as all the staff go to the handover meeting.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and well-being to maximize their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Care records captured the support people required with their health needs. Staff understood people’s health needs and were aware of what action they should take when there was any deterioration to an individual’s health. For example, staff knew to escalate the concerns, seeking medical advice as required.

Catering staff were aware of people’s dietary needs, meal preferences and were notified of any changes promptly. A person told us, “The kitchen staff accommodate me if I am going out, they provide me with an early lunch. The staff do listen to me if I don’t like something they offer me an alternative.”

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.

Staff used national recognised tools to monitor people's health, and we saw evidence of prompt action had been taken when a change was identified. For example, when a person had experienced problems eating, a referral had been made to external professionals to seek support and guidance. Where people required support with repositioning to support their skin integrity, this had been regularly documented as having been carried out.

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

People had mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions in place when relevant and these had been completed in line with best practice. Staff told us they had received training on the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and how this was followed in their day-to-day practice. We observed staff to offer and support people’s choices throughout our inspection.

Where people were deprived of their liberty the service had made appropriate Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) applications and monitored the progress of the applications.