Forest Lodge Rest 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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’s needs were assessed before they began using the service to ensure appropriate support was in place. Staff worked together to review care and ensure it reflected people’s current needs. This included sharing information across the team and updating records when people’s needs or preferences changed. People told us staff regularly discussed their care with them. One person told us, “I was asked about what I like and I dislike.” Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s needs and how these changed over time. They were able to describe how care was adapted to ensure it remained effective.

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.

The provider followed professional guidance and monitored people’s health needs to support effective care and treatment. Care records included structured guidance for staff on how people should be supported. People’s preferences, wishes and life histories were understood and reflected in their care plans. Records showed care plans were regularly reviewed and updated when people’s needs changed.Staff were knowledgeable about people’s needs and were able to describe how care was provided in line with individual preferences. This reflected the information recorded in care plans.

People had mixed views about the food provided at the home. While some people told us they were happy with the meal choices and portion size, most people we spoke with felt the food was generally bland and meat variety was limited. One person told us they would like more fibre and vegetables included in their meals, as well as larger portions. We shared this feedback with the provider, who told us they planned to meet with the people living at the home to develop a new menu.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

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 provider supported people’s wellbeing by offering a wide range of meaningful activities and encouraging routines that helped people stay engaged. For example, people were supported to access the community regularly, which helped promote their wellbeing.

People had access to drinks and snacks whenever they wanted, supporting their nutritional and hydration needs. Staff monitored people’s health and sought appropriate access to health professionals when needed. One person told us, “The doctor comes in now and again and I see the optician each year.” A relative told us, “They’ve arranged a dentist appointment for [my family member].”

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.

Records showed care plans and risk assessments were regularly reviewed. All staff had access to up-to-date information on people’s current needs through the electronic care planning system. There provider had effective approaches in place to monitor people’s health, care and wellbeing outcomes. This helped staff recognise early signs when people were becoming unwell and take appropriate action.

Relatives told us they felt staff knew people well. One person told us, “They know [my family member] well. They have improved a lot since being here.”

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

Records showed mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions had been completed for individual decisions. Staff received training in relation to the MCA and understood the importance of gaining consent from people. One staff member told us, “If someone lacks capacity, I make sure they are treated with respect and involve senior staff and other professionals when decisions need to be made in their best interest.” Mental capacity assessments included specific decisions and considered whether people could understand, retain and weigh up the information and communicate their decisions.