Olivemede

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.

People and those close to them confirmed they were involved in initial and on-going assessments. Records were person centred and reflected what was important to the person.

The registered manager undertook a pre-admission assessment of each person prior to them being admitted to the service, except for one person who was on short term admission. Other people’s assessments we reviewed contained details of the person, their likes and dislikes, health conditions and all aspects of their lives. This initial information formed the basis of a plan on how to best support the person. Care plans in place were regularly reviewed and updated as people’s needs changed.

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.

People and their relatives spoke positively about the care provided and told us the staff looked after them well. Comments included “The staff are good, always available to help. “The staff know what they are doing, they couldn’t be more helpful.”

Risk assessments where completed and care plans identified areas requiring evidence-based support. Care records included up-to-date nutrition and hydration guidance, supporting staff to meet people’s needs effectively.

Collaboration with healthcare professionals was evident, with timely interventions supporting people’s wellbeing.

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.

Information was shared with health and social care professionals to support continuity of care. Staff and management worked collaboratively with external agencies to plan and deliver joined-up care and support that met people’s individual needs. A health professional told us, “I think this is one of the best homes I work with, brilliant communication they follow instructions to improve people’s care.” This partnership approach supported positive outcomes for people and ensured that care remained coordinated and consistent.

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 had access to healthcare professionals where this was required, such as the GP, chiropodist and Speech and Language Therapy (SALT) team. One relative said, “Care is excellent and friendly. I’ve not had any issues with GPs or medicines. The district nurse visits each day to [carry out a medical task].

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.

People felt that because staff knew them well, they were able to intervene and support them effectively when they became aware of an issue or deterioration in their health. One relative told us, “The care is good and safe, staff are on the ball with GP visits and medication.”

Relatives told us they were kept well informed of any changes their family member may be experiencing. One relative said, “The staff communicate well and they always call me back and update me.” Another relative told us, “The Staff were very quick to spot [relative] was poorly, they have picked up on quite a few things since they went into the home, and the staff sorted it out right away and let us know which is reassuring.”

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

The provider had systems and processes that ensured the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) was followed effectively, to support people who lacked capacity to make specific decisions about their care. Mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions were completed following the principles of the MCA, to ensure decisions made on behalf of people were made lawfully.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the MCA. In care homes, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People that were assessed as requiring a DoLS had these in place.

Staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and understood its principles. Staff respected people’s choices and were receptive when people shared their views and wishes.