- Care home
Trinity Court
Assessment report published 22 September 2026
Contents
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
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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.
This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.
Assessing needs
The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.
Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
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.
How staff, teams and services work together
We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.
Supporting people to live healthier lives
We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.
Monitoring and improving outcomes
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.
Consent to care and treatment
The provider told people about their rights around consent but did not always fully comply with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Although people’s mental capacity had been assessed, more detail was required within these assessments to ensure they reflected the support people required to make specific decisions about their care. The registered manager was aware this was an area they needed to improve. They had a plan in place to ensure people’s mental capacity assessments contained relevant detail about how they were supported to make decisions including a record of any decisions made in people’s best interests.