Amathea

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.

All pre-admission assessments were carried out by appropriate senior staff. People, and their families were involved where appropriate. These assessments formed the individual care plans which we found to be comprehensive and person centred.

We found peoples communication needs were considered when completing care plans, for example one person where staff used photographs to support their communication needs.

We found peoples care plans were regularly reviewed and that people and their families were involved in these reviews.

One person told us, “I do my review every six months, and they always ask you about stuff.”

A family member we spoke to told us, “We do the care plan and reviews”.

Peoples care plans were updated monthly by staff and we found these to be clear, detailed and reflected peoples changing needs where appropriate.

Care plan audits were completed on a regular basis by the management team which meant any updates needed were identified and actioned.

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.

We found people had enough food and drink to meet their needs. Dietary needs were supported, and we observed people being well supported by staff during mealtimes.

We observed staff to be patient, caring and interactive when supporting people to eat.

A family member told us, “The staff are excellent, they really know what they are doing, the food is very good, [relative] has put on weight, but [relative] needed to.” Another told us, “They bend over backwards to get [relative] to eat, and they try to get all the high calorie drinks into [relative] as well.”

People had appropriate risk assessments in place where needed, and staff used the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) to assess people’s nutritional needs.

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.

Peoples care plans were up to date and easily accessible to all staff. Staff used handheld devices to update records during the day and to note any concerns or changes in needs.

Staff worked well with other agencies to share information and were proactive in making any necessary changes to peoples care and support needs.

A weekly care review meeting was held with the local GP who told us, “I find staff attentive, staff follow recommendations, there are never any issues.”

District nurses visit daily and told us the home was “Proactive in letting us know of issues before we go in.”

Multi-disciplinary team working was evident, we found evidence of referrals to other services, for example speech and language therapy (SALT) and Care Home Education Support Services (CHESS). A visiting professional told us, “Referrals received are appropriate and in a timely manner.” They also told us, “They appear proactive in considering fundamental needs and applying knowledge of previous strategies to resolve any issues before referral.”

Peoples care plan information and details are readily accessible to be provided to other agencies, for example if hospital admission was required.

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.

We found people’s health and wellbeing needs were met by staff encouraging and supporting people to maximise their choices on a daily basis.

We found a range of daily activities available for people either as a group or one to one if they preferred.

There were diary planners on both floors outlining activities, these included exercise, quizzes, outings, themed days, the king’s birthday celebrations amongst others.

A family member told us, “The entertainment is wonderful, [ relative] will be up and dancing, [relative] loves to dance, so good for [relative].”

Outings were held regularly, for example each week people were supported to go to the local pub where they could join the wider community. Other outings were also regularly planned with the use of a local minibus, this allowed people to access local areas which may previously have been familiar or significant to them.

Weekly music therapy sessions were in place which we observed and which were well attended with good participation from people.

An outdoor space was available for people, which included an enclosed garden area with table and chairs.

Inside there were seating areas in the corridors with views of the garden, or the roadway outside or the local school, which were well used by people, offering them a choice of views and space.

A person we spoke to told us, “I do go out with the staff sometimes or my family.”

We found evidence of people being supported to access external health services when required for example dentists.

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.

Staff recorded people’s food and fluid intakes where necessary and referred people onto appropriate services if they had concerns or if they felt a more specialist service was needed.

People who did not wish to participate in group activities were supported by staff with one-to-one activities in their rooms. A staff member told us, “If people can’t come and they want to, we will do singing with them in their rooms, or little quizzes or maybe a hand massage.”

People were involved in reviewing and monitoring their own care needs wherever possible. A person told us, “I do my care plan review; they are particular about that.”

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

We found people were supported to make decisions. A staff member told us, “We ask people for their consent when doing personal care, guide them through things.” They also told us, “Some people are able to make decisions; we ask people about what clothes they want to wear.” Another told us, “We never assume what people would like.”

Consent was recorded clearly on peoples care plans for example around information sharing, use of photographs, and the use of motion sensors.

Staff received training on the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and felt confident in using this.

Power of attorney information was clearly documented where relevant for people on their care plans.