Clayton 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 for this service under the new 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 made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Systems and processes were in place to ensure people’s needs were accurately assessed prior to admission. People and relatives had the opportunity to be involved in care reviews. The provider was taking action to improve documentation regarding people’s involvement.

People’s communication needs were met and records reflected individual health and wellbeing needs.

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.

Nationally recognised assessment tools were in place to support accurate assessment of people’s needs and risks. These were regularly reviewed and updated as required. Governance systems in place ensured accurate monitoring of good practice standards.

People had enough to eat and drink. Individual dietary needs were met. People gave mostly positive feedback about the food, however some people felt it could be improved. Comments included, “It’s nice food, can’t complain,” “The food has improved,” and “The food is fifty fifty, it depends.” The provider was taking action to address improvements identified during the assessment in relation to the dining experience, to ensure a consistently positive experience for all people.

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 demonstrated effective teamwork and worked closely with external professionals to provide coordinated care and meet people’s needs. People’s information was readily available to be shared with professionals and other services when needed.

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 were supported to maintain their health, wellbeing and independence. They were supported to attend healthcare appointments when needed, for example, hospital appointments. People benefited from positive relationships with staff, who considered their individual choices and preferences when providing support.

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.

Effective systems and processes ensured people’s health was safely monitored. The registered manager had oversight of people’s health needs to support positive outcomes. People and relatives gave positive feedback in relation to staff responding appropriately and escalating any health concerns to relevant professionals.

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

The service operated in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act (MCA), ensuring decisions were made lawfully and in people’s best interests when they lacked capacity to make specific decisions. Staff sought people’s consent before providing care and support, in an individualised way, that reflected people’s wishes.