Ridgway 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.

The registered manager assessed people’s needs before they moved into the service. People’s needs were usually assessed in-person and once people moved into the service, assessments were updated. Assessments included people’s allergies, the social support required, communication needs and medical history.

People, their relatives and professionals were involved in the assessment process and were able to choose the care they would like. One person told us, “I told them what I want and they’ve done it."

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 and their relatives told us nutritional needs were met and that they had a choice of what they liked. One person told us, “There’s always 2 choices. If I want plain chicken, they’ll do it. They’ll change it for you.” A relative commented, “He likes his food. He definitely enjoys the food.”

Staff completed nationally recognised tools, such as the malnutrition universal screening tool (MUST) to assess people’s risk of unplanned weight loss. There were systems in place to record people’s weight weekly where they had experienced unplanned weight loss and concerns were shared with the person’s GP. In relation to training, staff had completed nationally recognised training, such as in relation to learning disabilities and autism.

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 and their relatives told us care was coordinated and staff worked well internally and with external partners, including healthcare professionals and within the local community. One relative told us, “Mum’s changed her GP to their GP; they're very proactive for that.”

Staff knew people’s needs well and shared information appropriately. Staff completed daily handovers to communicate changes about people’s needs and what their plans were for the upcoming day. One member of staff told us, “We have meetings and handovers when we come on shift.”

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 and their relatives told us staff supported them with their healthcare needs and ensured they had access to a range of healthcare professionals. One person told us, “The chiropodist comes once every 2 months.” Staff ensured information from healthcare professionals was recorded in people’s care records. One relative told us, “She's going to go in this week and have a review with her new GP.” Another relative commented, “The GP visits every month; he’s also given me a lot of time.”

Care records showed that instructions from professionals were recorded and followed by staff, and feedback from healthcare professionals who were involved in people’s care reflected this. A healthcare professional told us, “Before each of my visits, I will liaise with the manager or her deputy and check on any necessary updates regarding the residents I will be seeing.”

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 and their relatives told us staff followed healthcare professionals’ advice and instructions to monitor people’s outcomes. One relative told us, “If she does see a doctor, they keep me posted about it. In fact, they keep me posted about everything; they ring me up.”

Staff told us they used a variety of methods to monitor and improve people’s outcomes. One member of staff told us, “[Person] has got a lot of skin folds and we check them morning and night. We put [specific cream] on. I’d let the senior know if it was red.”

Healthcare professionals told us staff worked with them and followed their instructions which resulted in positive outcomes for people. A healthcare professional told us, “The staff are great and I work well with them, they are happy to escalate any issues that require an MDT (multidisciplinary team).” Another healthcare professional commented, “If there is an issue with a resident, they will contact me and arrange a visit (if needed outside my planned visits) and likewise, if I feel a resident needs further help than I can provide, eg the GP or similar, I will raise this with them and it is actioned.”

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

People and their relatives told us staff sought consent from people and respected people’s decisions. One person told us, “They certainly ask before they do whatever to me.” A relative commented, “The staff treat mum with real respect and real kindness and real patience, because you need patience for people.”

Staff had undertaken relevant training and understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The registered manager also understood their responsibilities in relation to the MCA and how to escalate concerns. Staff assessed people’s capacity where they had indications that the person may be lacking mental capacity. A member of staff told us, “I ask them what do they want to wear. They pick their menus every day. Can I do this for you? It’s just courtesy. I wouldn’t want to be put in clothes I haven’t picked so why should they?” Another member of staff told us, “You always have to assume there’s capacity unless it’s proven that it’s not the case. Even if they make decisions that are not safe, you have to guide them but let them as best as you can.”