The DurhamGate 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 inspection of this 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 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff at the service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. A relative commented, “[Name] had an assessment when they moved in.” Staff said there were effective systems in place to assess and monitor people’s needs. This included handover meetings between incoming and outgoing staff on shift, daily meetings and staff meetings.

Staff 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 ensured people’s health needs were monitored and they received a nutritious diet, which, when needed, followed dietitian’s guidance. The catering staff understood people’s needs and how to promote a healthy diet. People received a varied diet, and improvements had been made to menus as a result of their feedback. People commented, “There is plenty to eat” and “Menus have improved because of our feedback at resident meetings.”

However, people's dining experience on the ground floor needed improvement to ensure staff supported or encouraged people to eat during the lunch time meal. We observed staff carried out ancillary duties, took breaks whilst people sat waiting and falling asleep at the dining table after lunch. Sample plates were not shown at the mealtime to help people make a choice of food to help ensure they enjoyed their meal. We discussed staff deployment with he registered manager who addressed this immediately and after the visit we received evidence of the additional dining audits taking place.

Staff at the service worked well across teams and services to support people to ensure they received timely, seamless and consistent care. They made timely referrals and worked very well with other agencies to ensure people's treatment needs were met. A person commented, “The GP comes as fast as staff can get one.”

Staff always supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to fully maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. Staff worked closely with other professionals. People and relatives told us they were supported to access health care. A relative commented, “[Name] needed to go to hospital. A member of staff went with them. I joined them, staff managed it very well.”

Staff at the service monitored all people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they fully met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. Care plans were detailed, personalised and provided guidance to ensure outcomes could be met; ensuring people received safe, consistent and effective support. There was a system of regular evaluation of risk assessments and people's care plans. Reviews were carried out regularly with people to ensure people's support and outcomes were monitored and in line with their wishes. A relative commented, “We have a meeting if [Name]’s needs change.”

Staff told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Assessments were carried out, around people’s mental capacity and care records contained relevant information. Records captured all the relevant others involved in Best Interest decision making, where people did not have the mental capacity to give consent.