Grace Care Centre

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 prior to their admission to the service. The registered manager and deputy completed a pre-assessment of people in hospital, their own home or another care service. This was to ensure the service could meet the person’s needs and allowed the service time, to put any measures in place and to plan for their admission. Pre-admission assessments considered people’s needs, choices, preferences and how they wished to receive care. People were offered a visit to the service to look around and to meet the staff team. They were asked if they wished to spend the day at the service and to have a meal. People’s care plans were developed based on the initial pre-admission assessment, with further information added in time.

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 were actively involved with the care planning process. People’s care plan and daily notes was recorded on the service’s electronic care planning system. The staff recorded the daily support given to people, using handheld devices. Wellbeing checks, repositioning charts and people’s food and fluid intake were recorded. Full oversight was maintained by the management team, to help indicate any deterioration in people’s overall health.

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. The registered manager had developed positive working relationships with partner agencies, to achieve the best possible outcomes for people. The service worked with a range of professionals, which included the local GP surgery, district nursing team, commissioners and the local authority safeguarding team. Professional advice was sought promptly when needed, with guidance from healthcare professionals recorded. Professionals gave positive feedback regarding the working relationship they had with the service. One professional told us, “I have developed a strong working relationship with both the care and management team. We work collaboratively to achieve the best possible outcomes for the residents. I regularly offer suggestions to support improvements, and the care home staff are proactive in implementing these changes.”

Information regarding people’s wellbeing and updates, were shared during daily handover meetings with staff. Departmental leads attended meetings with the registered manager and deputy with updates provided. This helped to maintain oversight of people’s health and wellbeing.

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 ensure their personal preferences and needs, were at the centre of their care. The service had recruited an executive chef who was enthusiastic and had made a difference in changing the menus, to offer a selection of nutritious meals. When people were newly admitted to the service information of their dietary requirements were given to the catering team. The executive chef looked through the form and logged the information in their own communication system. A staff member told us, “My book is updated every month especially for things like risk of malnutrition. We have a couple of white boards to show any information of concern, so there’s no room for mistake.” People’s dietary and cultural preference were taken in account, and the menus had a 4-weekly rotation. The service had an alternative menu for people who wished to have something different. For example, jacket potatoes, omelettes and sandwiches. Overall, people were complimentary about the food and menu choices. One person told us, “The food is alright, I enjoy it.” Another person told us, I am a vegetarian and I ask them for fish mainly. They cut my food up into small chunks so I can eat it without any problems. They could perhaps do with a bit more variety.”

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 approach to care was ensuring the best outcomes were delivered to people, with a holistic approach to care. The provider employed its own specialist nurses who were able to provide expert advice, emotional support and support to devise strategies to provide good outcomes for people. They worked closely with the services dementia lead.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The MCA requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. We found the service was working within the principles of the MCA. Where people lacked capacity, assessments had been carried out with best interest’s decisions recorded. The staff had received Mental Capacity Act training and were aware of how to gain consent from people. They supported people using the least restrictive approach.