Timperley 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 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 received a comprehensive assessment of their needs before moving into the home. These assessments, combined with information from other health and social care professionals, supported the development of care plans that placed the person at the centre of their care.

The provider made full use of all available information, including input from hospital consultants, speech and language therapists, and social work teams.

In addition to health and medical details, assessments captured people’s cultural needs, aspirations, and communication preferences. Personal information such as likes and dislikes was also recorded. Staff were able to read copies of the assessment, so they were fully informed about each person’s needs before admission.

One person told us about their experience of the assessment process, “We had more help than we thought. They (staff) explained what will happen. We can discuss and not told (what to do).” Other people and their relatives confirmed that needs and preferences were explored thoroughly before moving into the home.”

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 used recognised clinical tools, including the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), to assess and monitor nutritional risks. This enabled early identification of concerns and ensured people received timely, appropriate interventions. Evidence‑based approaches were embedded in day‑to‑day practice.

National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance was followed in relation to pressure ulcer prevention and falls prevention.

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.

Communication between health and social care systems was effective. Regular dialogue took place with health professionals, including GPs and district nurses, which supported the provider in responding promptly to emerging illnesses or changes in people’s health.

When a person required an emergency hospital admission, copies of assessments and medication records were shared with the hospital team. Additional information, such as the person’s communication style and cultural needs, was also provided to help hospital staff deliver appropriate and personalised care.

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 were reviewed by a GP during weekly medical rounds when required. This enabled early identification and treatment of emerging illnesses, helping to reduce the need for hospital admissions.

We observed that people were supported to maintain a healthy and nutritious diet. They had constant access to drinks and fresh fruit and spoke positively about the meals and overall dining experience. One relative told us, “Staff understand [Name’s] likes and dislikes. Staff know [their] preference.”

A range of activity sessions encouraged light exercise, and people had access to a secure, accessible garden where they could enjoy fresh air.

People were supported to maintain their independence. Staff ensured people had access to appropriate equipment, such as walking aids, which helped them remain mobile and active.

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.

The provider had effective systems in place to monitor people’s health, wellbeing, and overall outcomes. Regular reviews of care plans, risk assessments, and clinical observations enabled staff to identify changes promptly and adjust support accordingly. Audits, feedback, and incident analysis were used to drive continuous improvement, ensuring that care remained responsive, evidence‑based, and focused on achieving positive outcomes for people living in the home.

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

Staff consistently sought consent from people before providing care and support. They demonstrated a clear understanding of the principles of consent, including that people have the right to withdraw their consent at any time.

Consent was obtained from people and, where appropriate, their families when they first moved into the home. When people were unable to provide consent due to changes in their cognition, care and support were delivered in their best interests and recorded accordingly.

Where representatives held the legal authority to make decisions on a person’s behalf, the required documentation such as lasting power of attorney was available to confirm this.