Richmond 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 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 review meetings with the GP and other healthcare agencies involved in people’s care ensured that their needs were reviewed regularly and holistically.

One relative said about the staff, “They know my relative’s needs and they are very well cared for”. “They know my relative’s needs and understand them well, and they tell me how they are doing whenever I visit.”

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.

Staff and leaders were knowledgeable about legislation which was relevant to the lives of people they were supporting, and mandatory training was delivered informing staff about legislation.

The provider used nationally recognised health and social care tools to monitor people’s health and identify any concerns. For example, tools were in place where appropriate to monitor people’s nutritional and fluid intake, weight, pain levels and skin integrity. Using these tools meant that communication with other professionals regarding people’s health and wellbeing was effective. For example, when district nurses visited, they were able to look at a person’s care notes and quickly gain the information they need because staff monitored people’s health and wellbeing using the same health and social care tools that the district nurses used.

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 worked well together to provide consistent and coordinated care that met people's needs and this was evident in the way we observed staff working together to complete care tasks such as supporting people with limited mobility to mobilise safely, or communicating effectively over tasks that needed completing.

Systems were in place to ensure that staff communicated effectively with each other and with other services. For example, a handover sheet was completed between shifts so that important information could be handed over, and a communication book advised staff of changes to people’s medication, visits from the GP, or visits from social workers.

The service worked effectively with healthcare professionals and external agencies to achieve positive outcomes for people. We saw evidence of regular communication and referrals to services such as GPs, district nursing teams, dementia outreach teams, physio and podiatrist teams.

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.

The service employed dedicated kitchen staff who prepared meals using a healthy, planned menu that operated on a rotating schedule. Nutritious alternative options were available at every mealtime, ensuring people could choose meals they enjoyed while meeting their dietary needs.

The provider used healthcare monitoring tools to track key indicators, including weight, fluid intake, and nutritional intake. This enabled staff to identify any significant changes in a person's health at an early stage and take a proactive approach to supporting their wellbeing through informed choices and appropriate interventions.

One person told us, “The food's lovely.”

Relatives spoke positively about the care and support provided. One relative said, “They know my relative’s needs and are always doing things with them. They are clearly well-fed and doing better than they were at home.” Another commented, “They have helped my relative to walk again, and both the staff and our family actively encourage them to continue walking.”

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.

Staff and leaders completed audits on a regular basis which helped to maintain quality and identify any areas of concern. Audits contained an “action taken” column which evidence what the provider had done to recognise a concerning trend and improve it. For example, a care plan audit was completed on a 3 monthly basis. Some actions identified included “Requires updating with recent changes in health” or “Will need updating as we get to know resident better”. This showed that the provider regularly checked the care plans for quality improvement purposes.

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

Staff consistently provided people with choices and informed those who lacked the capacity to consent about the care they were about to receive before any intervention took place. This reflected staff's commitment to respecting individuals' rights and promoting informed consent wherever possible.

When people were unable to communicate their wishes, staff relied on detailed care plans to provide care that reflected their known preferences. These plans were informed by observations of activities and experiences people had previously enjoyed, as well as guidance from their relatives.

Care plan documents had been completed in collaboration with people and their families, and where people were unable to consent to any aspect of their care, a mental capacity assessment and best interest decision had been made and documented, in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.