Amy Woodgate

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 newly registered service. 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.

People, and others important to them, had been actively involved in assessments of their needs which the managers conducted prior to anyone’s admission to the care home. The assessment considered people’s personal, social and health care needs, and expressed wishes and preferences which were used to develop individualised packages of care. Assessments were routinely reviewed and updated accordingly to reflect any changes in people 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.

People received personal care and support from staff according to their individually assessed needs and wishes. Care plans were comprehensive and detailed covering peoples’ individual needs and were reviewed and updated regularly. Staff understood each person’s needs and how these should be met. Staff told us guidance in peoples care and risk management plans were easy to understand and follow, including those relating to nutrition, moving and handling, and positive behavioural support. Catering staff demonstrated good awareness of people’s diverse dietary needs and wishes. People had sufficient opportunities to engage in meaningful leisure and recreational activities that reflected their social interests. People and their families were supported to be involved in discussions about people’s interests, and what they liked to do socially was recorded in their care plan. Staff were aware who was at risk of becoming socially isolated and what action they need to take to reduce this risk.

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.

People were supported by managers and staff who worked well-together to deliver coordinated, consistently safe care. Staff described strong teamwork and clear communication processes. They consulted effectively with each other and with their line managers and senior staff, as well as external health and social care professionals and bodies when needed. Systems were in place to make sure information was shared in a timely manner by everyone involved in people’s care. For example, staff consistently handed over important information between care staff to ensure everyone remained up to date about peoples changing care needs and wishes. The deputy manager told us they had worked closely with the local falls prevention team and managed to half the number of falls incidents people living in the care home had experienced in the last 12 months.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

People were supported by staff to maintain their health and well-being in line with their assessed needs and personal wishes. People told us staff helped them maintain regular contact with relevant external health care professionals. A relative told us, “The staff called the GP straight away when my [family member] became unwell recently, which certainly helped prevent their health getting any worse. The staff catching this health issue as quickly as they did really helped.”

Staff recognised when people were unwell, in pain, experiencing discomfort or showing signs of infection, and supported them to access appropriate health care services. For example, staff ensured people routinely attended scheduled health care appointments and had regular screening and check-ups with a range of community-based health care professionals including, GP’s, district nurses and opticians.

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 experienced positive outcomes from the care and support provided by staff. People’s care and support was regularly reviewed to ensure this was meeting their assessed needs and expected outcomes. Staff monitored the care and support provided to people and knew what action to take if any improvements to this were required. Systems were in place to monitor the care and support provided to people to ensure this remained effective.

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

The service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005. Staff involved people in their care, offering choices and respecting people’s decisions. Mental capacity assessments were completed with people and others involved in their care. Where people did not have the capacity to consent to their care, managers liaised with the relevant local authorities and held best interests’ meetings with those that had legal authorisation to make decisions on people’s behalf. A person told us they had been invited to attend a multi-professionals meeting with their social worker, keyworker and the service managers to collectively decide if they would be safe to engage in a specific activity. Staff had received Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (Dols) training.