Acton Care Centre

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 and their family members.

People’s needs were assessed before they started using the service to ensure staff could meet people’s needs and preferences.

Assessments contained information about people's care needs, care preferences, preferred times of care, any religious or cultural beliefs and their personal relationships.

Assessments of needs were appropriately detailed and were regularly reviewed and updated. Each assessment helped for the persons care plan. They had a system of 'resident of the day' when they reviewed people's assessed needs and care plans each month. This helped to ensure assessments were accurate and up to date.

A relative told us “I did the care plan with the Home and we have had several reviews since to alter aspects of [relative] care. I have to say the care is very good”

The provider planned and delivered care in partnership with people, considering what was important to them and what mattered most in their daily lives. Care and treatment were provided in line with relevant legislation, evidence-based best practice, and recognised standards.

People received evidence-based care which reflected best practice. Staff undertook a wide range of training. This was regularly reviewed and updated. They also took part in team meetings, supervisions and reflective practice to discuss how best to care for people.

Staff told us training was useful. A staff member commented, “We get knowledge about new things and increase skills.”

Staff ensured people received nutritional and hydration support in line with best practice. They consulted relevant professionals. Staff monitored people’s weight, food and fluid intake. They responded to any changes in these. People and their relatives told us the food was good. Comments from relatives included, “The food [relative] says is very good, [they] like it, there is always tea and cakes about.” Another relative told us, “I think the food is OK, [relative] says they like it.” “If [relative] isn’t well they get the doctor and they have sent [relative] to hospital, that is good”

People and their relatives told us they were happy with the way staff supported them, and felt their needs were understood and responded to appropriately.

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.

There was a collaborative approach in supporting people’s care needs. Staff communicated effectively with other professionals. Referrals to external health and social care professionals were made promptly when needed and care records, as well as observations, confirmed that guidance and recommendations were followed.

We spoke with two health care professionals who were on site during our assessment. They both provided positive feedback. They confirmed that clinical action taken by staff appeared to be effective and there was no evidence of delay in taking action. They told us, “Staff are always polite in their approach.”

Staff communicated well with each other. There were regular handovers of information and meetings as well as systems for sharing communication. Staff were knowledgeable about the needs of people living in the home and were respectful when discussing people’s care needs.

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.

Staff supported people with their health and wellbeing and made referrals to relevant health services when necessary.

Relatives told us the service was proactive in recognising and responding to changes in people's needs, including making timely referrals to GPs and other professionals. One relative shared a positive example: “We needed physio for [relative] the person who does the yoga here now sees [relative] privately for exercise and that’s been brilliant. I can’t praise them enough.”

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. The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They were able to demonstrate how people’s health was monitored and through their knowledge of people and when to seek professional help to achieve the right outcomes for people. People’s care plans evidenced regular check-ins and updates. Daily notes were completed at the correct specified times to support people’s personal needs.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People consented to their care and treatment. Staff assessed people’s mental capacity to make different decisions. People were offered choices and supported to consent when they were able to. The staff knew them well and understood how to present information to enable each person to make a choice.

We observed staff asking people where they wanted to sit at lunch time and what they wanted to eat. Staff listened and were led by the individual’s choices that they had given consent for.

Staff demonstrated an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and applied its principles, including the presumption of capacity.