Goldenpark 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 ensured people's care and treatment remained effective by consistently assessing and reviewing their health, wellbeing, communication, and care needs in partnership with them.

Staff described working closely with healthcare professionals to support joined-up care. Care plans were regularly reviewed, and staff shared how understanding people’s preferences helped tailor support around activities they enjoyed. A staff member shared, “For example, we refer people to the falls team if their mobility changes. We keep care plans and risk assessments up to date so we can see if anyone’s needs are changing.”

A relative told us, “We are involved on an ongoing basis. They always update us.”

A healthcare professional told us all documentation is recorded on the provider’s electronic record keeping system, with designated books used for doctors’ ward rounds and a named link connecting the home to the surgery.

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.

Staff involved people in planning their care and support. Care was tailored to individual people. People’s nutritional needs were assessed and met. Staff encouraged people to enjoy a healthy balanced diet but also respected their choices and decisions in relation to food and drinks. People and relatives were complimentary about the food and felt people’s dietary requirements were catered for. A relative told us, “The food is lovely my [family member] loves it, they are always offered a choice, and they always ask if I want anything.”

A relative told us “My [family member] was very thin when they arrived and was refusing to eat because they were in so much pain. They coaxed my [family member] back to eating. They put on weight, and they support my [family member] with their meals they always ask my [family member] if they need help. My [family member] can always ask for extra food during the day, they [staff] are very flexible, and they [staff] also encourage my [family member] to drink.”

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.

Staff worked collaboratively with external professionals and agencies, including GPs, speech and language therapists, community psychiatric nurses (CPNs), physiotherapists, and the local authority safeguarding team. This multidisciplinary approach ensured people received coordinated, person-centred care that met their individual needs.

We could see evidence a person on 24-hour 1:1 support was regularly reviewed with the Integrated Care Board (ICB) to assess ongoing need. A multidisciplinary review led to a personalised care plan including a PIR sensor, CPN referral, and GP medication review. As a result, 1:1 support was safely reduced to 18 hours per day. The provider continued to monitor this to ensure care remained appropriate.

A visiting professional shared, “We come every Wednesday regardless and if there's a need to come sooner, the service will get in touch.”

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 needs for care and support.

People and their relatives told us they had a wide range of meal choices available, supporting preferences. One person said, “There is always plenty of food, I love the biscuits and homemade cakes.”

Evidence showed during the ‘resident of the day’ process, the chef consulted with individuals to discuss food preferences and dietary needs. Resident of the day means each day a person was selected, and the provider reviewed and updated the person’s care plan. It provided an opportunity for staff to concentrate on the person’s needs, preferences, and wellbeing.

Diet and fluid intake records were reviewed and updated regularly to reflect any changes, supporting people’s health outcomes.

The provider had systems in place to routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to support continuous improvement. This helped ensure outcomes remained positive, consistent, and aligned with both clinical best practice and the preferences of individuals.

Care plans were regularly reviewed in collaboration with the person and their relatives to reflect any changes in support needs. One staff member told us, “Care plans and assessments are reviewed monthly and, if needed, changed to suit the person’s needs, depending on any changes in the level of support they require.”

The provider used a range of clinical tools to identify and manage risks to people's health and wellbeing. For example, ‘Waterlow’ assessments were carried out to assess and monitor people’s risk of skin damage. Where risks were identified, appropriate measures were implemented to reduce the likelihood of harm.

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

People told us staff involved them in decisions about their health and prompted them to carry out tasks to remain healthy. One person told us “Staff and I know what medication I am taking, and they help make sure I take it if I forget”.

Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and associated codes of practice. The MCA provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. One staff member told us, “When I’m assisting a person, I always ask for consent and explain what I’m doing slowly and clearly so they know what is happening.”

We saw evidence people made daily decisions about their routines and meals, and were offered meaningful choices around clothing, mealtimes, and activities.