Weald Heights

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’s needs were assessed before they moved into the home and regularly reviewed to ensure they were receiving appropriate support. Protected characteristics and diverse needs under the Equality Act formed part of this process. For example, people’s religious needs and preferences were captured. People and their relatives spoke positively about their introduction to the home, the process of capturing their care and support needs as well as their wishes and preferences. One relative said, “We loved it. Staff talked to us when we were here and asked about Mum and what help she needed.”

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them.

People received care, treatment and support that was evidence-based and in line with good practice standards. Each person had a full and completed initial assessment in place, an assessment that they confirmed involvement in.

Assessment of peoples care and risks were supported by use of best practice tools. For example, evidence-based guidance such as the Malnutrition universal screening tool (MUST) was used to help identify those at risk of malnutrition or those above health weight range. Other evidence-based tools were used to assess risk and need associated with falls, staffing levels and pressure area support. People who were identified as being at risk of skin integrity breakdown were monitored with repositioning charts so that staff could reduce the risk of skin breakdown.

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.

Information was shared between teams and services to ensure continuity of care, for example when clinical tasks are delegated or when people are referred between services. When people received care from a range of different staff, teams or services, it was co-ordinated effectively. For example, staff coordinated with Tissue viability nurses to support pressure area care and with Speech and Language Therapists. Feedback from people was positive. One person told us, “I’ve seen the Physio since I’ve been here. The doctor comes in and deals with anyone who has a problem, and I have been referred because of my (condition). I’ve seen them any time they have come in.” One relative said, “Mum doesn’t have to go anywhere really since they come here. You can see the Dentist, Optician, Chiropodist. It is good.”

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 supported to live healthier lives and had access to healthcare specialists and partners. Home visits were facilitated when people found it difficult to attend external appointments. One relative said, “Mum doesn’t have to go anywhere really since they come here. You can see the Dentist, Optician, Chiropodist. It is good.”

People at risk of choking or malnutrition were supported to maintain safe and consistent diets. Referrals to speech and language therapists were made for those needing assistance with swallowing, and meals were fortified to improve nutritional intake. The chef was knowledgeable about individuals' specific dietary requirements, including allergies and preferences. Feedback about dietary and the quality of food was positive. One relative said about their loved one, “He loves his food, especially the cakes. He has no special diet but eats very well. They do give him a choice.”

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent.

Outcomes of people’s health and well-being were monitored by staff. Care plans, risk assessments were consistently reviewed and updated to reflect people’s changing needs and to ensure that safe and effective support continued. Training, effective communication and information sharing to and between staff meant they were clear on the standard of care expected from the provider.

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

We observed people were consistently asked for consent from staff and were provided with choices in relation to where they spent their time, what they wanted to do. The home had systems and practices in place to ensure that people understood the care and treatment being offered or recommended. This helped them make an informed decision. People were supported in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). People’s care detailed their capacity and understanding their rights in making decisions. Staff received training on the Mental Capacity Act and understood their responsibilities regarding MCA.