Franklin House

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 of the service with this registered provider. 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 assessed people’s needs and choices so that care could be personalised. Managers met with people and their relatives before they moved to the home. A relative explained, “The matron meeting us was excellent. [They] took time to talk to us and explain about the service to [person]. This impressed us.”

Assessments of needs were appropriately detailed and were regularly reviewed and updated.

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, “The training is excellent. We get regular updates to our skills, and someone is always around to ask if we are unsure.”

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 told us they liked the food. A person said, “Meals are great. The quality and quantity of food is good. We always get a choice.” Staff offered and provided snacks and drinks throughout the day.

Staff communicated well with each other and external professionals. There were daily meetings where staff discussed any updates about the service and people they supported. Staff told us they had clear information about their roles and responsibilities. A staff member told us, “If anything changes with someone’s needs it is communicated properly during handovers.”

Visiting professionals had completed surveys about their experience for the provider. These were all positive and included praise for the way staff communicated with them and their skills. Some of their comments included, “[Staff are] very responsive and approachable”, “Staff are always helpful and friendly” and “The staff team are professional, efficient and caring.”

Staff supported people with their healthcare needs. Trained nurses worked at the service. They assessed, planned for and monitored people’s health needs. The service was supported by external professionals from the community healthcare teams. They undertook regular visits to the service. The registered manager told us this worked well, and they were able to discuss changes in people’s health needs to make sure they received the right support.

People using the service and their relatives told us they were able to see doctors and other healthcare professionals when needed.

Staff monitored people’s needs, care and outcomes. There were systems to help make sure people were safe and their needs were met. Care plans and assessments were reviewed monthly and updated when needed. Managers and nurses held regular meetings to discuss people’s healthcare needs, illnesses, infections and hospital admissions.

People and their relatives told us staff provided good quality care which had improved outcomes. A relative explained the person using the service could not walk or manage to eat independently when they moved to the service. However, they were able to do both those things now. The registered manager gave us examples of others who had experienced similar improvements.

People consented to their care and treatment. People confirmed they were offered choices in a meaningful way. Staff understood about their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Some people were not able to consent or understand complex decisions. The provider assessed their mental capacity. Managers liaised with their relatives and other representatives to make decisions in people’s best interests.