Meadow View Residential 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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently 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.

The registered manager had a good understanding of each person’s needs. They produced a clinical report which outlined people’s health conditions and if there were any changes in people’s needs. This information was then shared with all staff to ensure people’s needs were known and understood. Since our last inspection people’s needs had been reviewed and guidance and care plans implemented in areas where this was previously missing, for example for people who had epilepsy. Staff now had a good understanding of how best to support people.

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

People’s care plans did not always align with best practice guidance. For example, one person’s care plan stated that their catheter bag should be emptied when ‘nearly full.’ NHS guidance states that catheter bags should be emptied when they are ¾ full. The person’s care plan did not detail steps on how to change the catheter or how to keep it clean.

Other tools including ‘Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool’ to continually monitor people’s risk of malnutrition, or the ‘Waterlow’ tool to monitor people’s risk of people’s skin deteriorating were in place.

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 told us they worked well with a range of health professionals including the GP surgery, the district nurses and other professionals that visited and supported the service. People were supported to access the care and support they needed to ensure they received joined up care. A healthcare professional told us, “There’s not many issues I come across, on the whole I think they are a good home.”

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.

When the registered manager was made aware of people’s needs these were generally met. Most people were at a stable weight. Some people had lost weight, however they had been monitored by staff, referred to the relevant healthcare professionals and been supported to return to a healthy weight A relative told us, “They were giving him shakes at one stage because he was not eating well. We have not had concerns about his medicines and he’s started to put weight on now.”

Relatives told us that people had been supported to remain healthy. A relative told us, “He’s had all his jabs, we get a form we have to sign and also he gets chiropody for his toenails, he gets a haircut and they’re very good”.

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 at Meadow View Residential home were generally healthy and well. The registered manager had clinical oversight of people’s needs and ensured that people had access to the healthcare professionals they required. For example, when people lost weight, they had been referred to the dietician. When someone’s mobility had changed, they had been referred to the occupational therapist to help them continue to mobilise safely

The provider did not always tell people about their rights around consent and did not always respect their rights when delivering care and treatment.

Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to gaining consent for day-to-day tasks such as in relation to personal care or enabling people to make decisions about what they wore. Relatives also shared that people made decisions they wanted. A relative told us, “He has a say in what he wants to do, he likes to watch TV in his room.

However, within people’s care plans consent and capacity was not wholly understood. For example, one person’s care plan stated they had full capacity. Within the same care plan it stated that staff had sought consent from the persons representative to consent to terms relating to valuables the person took into the service. A person’s care plan stated that their representative had power of attorney (POA), however it was not clear that this should only be activated if the person did not have capacity. POA is a legal document that lets you give a trusted person the power to make choices and act for you.