The Old School House 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 assessment for this re registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were generally good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 67 (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.

During our first visit to the service a person was admitted to the service from hospital, to stay at the home for a short period. The service handled this admission well, getting the care plan in place before the person’s arrival and working with the person’s relatives to make sure they were comfortable as soon as they arrived.

The provider did not always plan and deliver people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them.

There were some oversights and errors in care planning and record keeping, however no person had come to harm. Peoples’ care was not being delivered to meet the needs of the whole person, including the provision of social and stimulating activities.

There was no service level approach to meeting people’s needs relating to dementia in a planned and research based manner.

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.

The service worked closely with discharge services at the local NHS hospital. Information was obtained by the service before the person was accepted by the service, to ensure they were able to meet their 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. For example, a person with dementia had lost considerable weight before they entered the service. The service had recognised this weight loss and had made repeated referrals for dietician support. While waiting for healthcare professional support the service had introduced a regime of offering the person small amounts, often through the day, of foods that the person was known to like as a gentle way of supporting the person to gain weight.

The provider did not always routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They did not always ensure that outcomes were positive and consistent, or that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

The service was adequately monitoring standard measures for people. For example, their weight and food and fluid intake as necessary for the individual. However, each person’s care was not being planned and recorded, to show that as well as personal care, the social, emotional and welfare of the individual person were also being supported. People commented there was not enough to do. Activities were not designed to meet the individual needs and preferences of each person, and their taking part in each social or stimulating activity was not recorded in their individual records. People told us they were bored and this had an impact on their emotional health and general wellbeing.

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

The service had a Mental Capacity Act (MCA) policy that covered all aspects of the MCA. All those who needed to have a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisation in place for their own safety had had one applied for by the service to the Local Authority. All Best Interests decisions and restrictions were recorded within people’s risk assessments.