Southbourne Beach 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.At our last inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has remained 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 service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.People’s care and support needs were assessed before they moved into the service, information was reviewed to ensure the service could meet the persons specific needs. People told us they could contribute to their care plans. Staff had access to information about people, through the providers electronic care planning system. Staff told us they had enough information about people. People’s care and support needs were assessed, reviewed, and updated as required. Records were accurate and reflected the care people had received. A clear review processwas in place called ‘resident of the day’ which had ensured people were involved, this included those who were important to them.

The service 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.People were involved in creating their care plans and assessments, they said they could ask to change their care plan when they needed to. Staff told us they worked with people to follow good practice guidance; this had included working to support people’s mobility and medical conditions. Evidence-based care and good practice guidance underpinned the policies, procedures and ways of working within the service.

The service had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. People told us staff supported them to keep safe and had helped to prevent them from harm and accidents, for example, by using specialist equipment. The service worked with people following an accident or incident to prevent a recurrence. Staff told us they were confident they supported people well and tried to find a solution if someone was having frequent falls. Daily, weekly and monthly monitoring and review meetings included learning from events within the service. This had supported learning and included reviewing events to identify themes and trends. Lessons were learned across the provider’s locations as information was shared. The registered manager had produced data from events into accessible formats for people and staff, this had included visual charts to illustrate data. Health and social care professionals were confident the service took a proactive response to adverse events. Records confirmed reviews were undertaken regularly and in accordance with the providers policy.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.Healthy lifestyles were promoted by the service and the provider, this had been applied to nutritional needs. Care plans and risk assessments were clear, and information was accessible to the kitchen staff. Where people were supported with food and drink there were detailed instructions in place, this included where a person may have difficulty swallowing or needed a special diet. Information about dietary needs were known to catering staff and displayed in the kitchen areas, including for weight loss, allergies and specific diets for medical conditions. People and their relatives were complimentary about the food on offer and one relative said, “We are so impressed with the food and the kindness of staff.” People had access to food and drink when they wanted, and their choices were varied. Information about people’s needs was shared efficiently as records were electronic, clear and comprehensive. The registered manager held a daily meeting, this ensured the staff responsible for food and drink were kept informed of changes. Physical and mental wellbeing was observed closely and in support of many external health and social care professionals, they were complimentary about the vigilance of the service to highlight concerns. Staff told us they knew people’s needs well.

The service 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 shared examples of how their lives had improved since living at the service. Care plans and risk assessments detailed clear goals and outcomes for people, and this included actions for staff on how to achieve them. People and their relatives told us there were many professionals involved in their care, who were accessible to them, this had given them peace of mind. The registered manager, during the inspection commenced a review of the electronic care planning system to ensure needs and outcomes were clear and accurate. Staff told us they understood they must work together with external professionals for the good of people. A health and social care professional told us, “Staff contact us the same day for urgent cases and via email for non-urgent care.”

The service told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.People told us they were given choices and options throughout each day. Relatives had been involved in decisions made on the persons behalf, where this was appropriate. Consent was sought from people and where necessary in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). There was a clear process in place to carry out MCA assessments where required. Records were detailed and contained ways in which staff had supported people to weigh up and retain information. Staff had received training in the MCA and were knowledgeable about their responsibilities to ensure they always sought consent and offered choices. Care was planned in the persons best interest in the least restrictive way and in consultation with others. MCA assessments detailed all the options explored, including how the person was supported to decide and how the best option was concluded.