Eastview Residential 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 71 (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 used a combination of information from local authorities, family members and people to complete a pre-admission assessment. They used the same form as the local hospital to ensure consistency. The registered manager told us that they, and a member of staff would meet the person as part of this process. They aimed to have a basic care plan in place prior to admission and then have the most important parts complete within 24 hours of arrival to support the delivery of safe and consistent care.

The provider did not always plan and deliver people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. People had a Waterlow assessments, a tool used to identify the risk of developing pressure ulcers, which indicated they were at very high risk of skin breakdown. There were no tissue viability care plans in place to manage these risks. One person's care plan stated they should lie down after lunch but did not include guidance on regular repositioning to reduce the risk of pressure damage. Daily records did not demonstrate that this support was consistently provided. This meant the provider could not be assured that the person's assessed risks were being effectively managed. No harm had occurred at the time of the inspection.

People’s needs were not always met in line with current standards and evidence-based guidance. Some people had recommended levels of thickness for food and drink under the International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI) framework. Staff preparing and serving food had not received IDDSI training. We made the registered manager aware of this on the day of inspection who sourced training for the staff immediately.

During lunchtime, we observed that portion sizes were small and people were not routinely offered second helpings. A relative said, “Today [family member] said lunch was tasty, but also said they didn’t have enough, they didn’t ask for more, they tend to give smaller portions.’’ This meant the provider could not be assured that people's nutritional needs and preferences were always being fully considered.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. Staff described strong teamwork and mutual support across the service. One staff member said '' There is a good teamwork within our service, and I feel supported in my role.’’

Staff also understood their role in sharing information effectively including in staff handover meetings. The staff team had a strong understanding of people’s needs, which contributed to consistent care. The manager made referrals and sought advice from professionals when needed, and in a timely manner. This supported joined-up working, helped ensure people's changing needs were identified and responded to promptly, and contributed to positive outcomes for people.

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 had regular access to the optician and chiropodist. Staff ensured that people got advice from healthcare professionals when they needed it and people were supported to attend healthcare appointments. Whilst there was good practice in managing health conditions and partnership working with other professionals, improvements could be made when it came to activities and meals on offer to include physical activity and healthy meal options.

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. Care plans had been reviewed monthly and updated to reflect changes in people's needs. Daily records showed that staff monitored and documented people's food and drink intake, as well as key information about their health and wellbeing. This helped staff identify potential concerns at an early stage and ensured changes in people's health could be responded to promptly. Relatives told us that staff picked up on changes in people’s needs quickly and made sure that they got professional advice when it was needed.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Staff had received Mental Capacity Act (MCA) training. They had a good understanding of the importance of seeking consent before providing care and were able to explain how and when consent was needed. Care plans showed that consent had been gained in line with data protection. This helped to ensure people's rights, choices and preferences were respected, supporting them to remain in control of decisions about their care and support.