Nightingale Court

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 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.
Regular reviews of people’s care plans were evident during our assessment. We reviewed several care plans, along with care plan audits completed by the management team. There is an ongoing plan to ensure care plans continue to be reviewed on a regular basis.
During the daily leadership meeting, one resident was selected for focused discussion, which included a review of their care plan.
People and their relatives were consistently involved in the care‑planning process, and the plans were person‑centred.
All relatives interviewed as part of the assessment, confirmed they felt involved and well informed about the care and support needs of their family members.

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.
Care was planned and delivered in line with recognised best practice and evidence‑based standards. Staff worked in partnership with individuals to ensure their priorities remained central to all decisions. The effective use of clinical tools and guidance supported ongoing assessment, monitoring, and adjustment of care, helping to ensure support was safe, personalised, and regularly reviewed to achieve the best possible outcomes.
For example, the records we reviewed showed the use of the International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI), which enabled the home to safely modify and manage people’s diets to reduce the risk of choking. During our assessment, the catering staff were able to clearly identify which individuals required modified diets, and they demonstrated good knowledge of dysphagia.

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 home maintained strong partnerships with external professionals to ensure people’s needs were met. Records reviewed during the assessment showed close collaboration with district nurses and advanced nurse practitioners weekly.
During staff interviews, team members demonstrated a strong understanding of the people they supported. For example, one staff member told us how they supported a resident who lacked capacity to make daily choices about breakfast and lunch. They described using their knowledge of the person’s history and preferences to offer appropriate and meaningful options.

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.
Care plans clearly outlined the support people required to meet their health needs. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of these needs and knew when to escalate any concerns about a person’s health or wellbeing. The management team had recently delivered additional training to senior staff, enabling them to identify and escalate concerns more promptly rather than waiting for management direction. This ensured people received timely and appropriate support.
Staff had completed training across a range of areas relevant to people’s needs, including diabetes, dysphagia, nutrition and hydration, and mental health.

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.
The management team had introduced systems to monitor and record key health outcomes, including people’s weight, food and fluid intake, and post‑fall observations. Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of how their observations and reporting contributed to improving outcomes for people. Information was shared effectively across the team through handovers and meetings, ensuring everyone remained aware of emerging risks or changes in people’s wellbeing. There was evidence that learning from incidents and feedback informed updates to care plans, supporting more responsive care and contributing to better experiences for people. For example, we reviewed a recent incident in which a person experienced a fall in their room. The record included a clear lessons‑learned process, involving a debrief with everyone involved, immediate actions taken, senior leadership review, and planned follow‑up actions. After speaking with the person, a sensor mat was introduced in their room to help staff support them safely while still promoting their independence.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.
When a person was assessed as lacking capacity, Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and best‑interest processes were followed to ensure all decisions were lawful, proportionate, and tailored to the individual’s needs. Records we reviewed showed involvement from the person, their relative or legal representative, and, where appropriate, medical professionals or the local authority.
All staff demonstrated a strong understanding of the legislation and their responsibilities when supporting people who were unable to make certain decisions independently. One staff member told us, “Capacity should be assumed unless proven otherwise. Everyone’s MCA and best‑interest decisions are recorded in care plans, and we always offer people choice every day."