Bluebell House Residential and Nursing 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

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.

We found the provider ensured people’s care and treatment was effective by consistently assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs.

Staff worked well with people, relatives and health professionals to develop a thorough understanding of people’s needs. One relative told us, “They came to our home and noted all medical needs, as well as discussing her life, her interests and cultural background.”

Another family member told us “The care plan was very well managed, when [they] arrived. We had a meeting with at least 12 people; the social worker, the doctor, hospital physio, people from Blue Bell House, we talked about absolutely everything else, for example his love of music particularly Elvis. They make sure there is a CD player in his room with the music he likes, they turn it on and off accordingly”

People’s care and support needs were regularly discussed through handovers, team meetings, which meant any changes were identified and acted on promptly. Records were updated in a timely way to reflect changes, ensuring care remained responsive to people’s needs. Care plans were detailed and personalised.

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 provider worked in partnership with GP’s and other health and social care professionals to support effective care delivery. One relative told us, “They have access to the doctor, and [they] have recently had new glasses.” This showed that when people’s needs changed, staff acted promptly to arrange and support access to healthcare appointments.

Care records included evidence of appointments and guidance from healthcare professionals to support people’s needs. Risks to people’s health and wellbeing were assessed and monitored using recognised tools, including those for malnutrition and pressure care. Staff took a proactive approach to supporting people’s nutritional needs.

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.

We found staff, teams and services worked effectively together to support people. Information was shared appropriately between staff through handovers and team meetings, which helped ensure continuity of care and kept staff updated on people’s changing needs. One relative told us “ They keep me involved in their care, [family member] Before [they] came in [to the home] the care plan was put into place, I was very involved and it was very detailed.”

Staff worked collaboratively with health and social care professionals to plan and deliver care, ensuring a coordinated approach. This meant people received consistent, timely and person-centred care, and their needs were understood and met across the service.

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 need for care and support.

We found the provider supported people to maintain and improve their health and wellbeing. People’s health needs were regularly monitored, and staff helped them access healthcare services such as GPs and other professionals when required.

Risks to people’s health were identified and reviewed, and staff responded promptly to any changes. People were supported to make choices that promoted their health and wellbeing, including maintaining good nutrition and hydration. This helped people to remain as independent as possible and supported them to live healthier lives.

One relative told us, “After one of [person’s] blood tests they[staff]found [their] cholesterol was raised, so they now encourage [them] to eat a complete variety of food.” This means staff responded to identified health needs and supported people to make healthier choices to improve their health and wellbeing.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive and consistent, and they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

We found the provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to improve outcomes. Systems were in place to review people’s needs, and staff used information from audits, care reviews and feedback to make improvements where required.

Changes in people’s health or wellbeing were identified and acted on promptly, and care plans were updated to reflect this. This supported people to receive consistent care that met their needs and promoted positive outcomes.

People were supported to monitor key aspects of their health. Staff checked for any signs of health deterioration, using recognised tools, such as 'Waterlow' and 'MUST'. We saw examples of how staff had appropriately escalated any concerns across teams and to external health and social care professionals, such as for people at high risk of falls.

The provider informed people about their rights regarding consent and respected these in practice.

We found the provider sought people’s consent before providing care and treatment. A staff member old us, “We always knock before entering rooms, ask for consent before providing care, and involve people in decisions about their support. Personal care is provided discreetly and respectfully.” We observed this in practice on the day of the inspection, with staff knocking on doors and seeking consent before delivering care.

Where people lacked capacity, the provider followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and made decisions in people’s best interests, ensuring people’s rights were respected.

One person who lacked capacity required a sensor mat to reduce the risk of harm. We saw evidence of a Mental Capacity Act assessment in place, along with documentation demonstrating this was the least restrictive approach. This meant risks were managed appropriately while respecting the person’s rights and promoting their independence.