Camden 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 review of this key question, it was rated 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.

Care plans and risk assessments were personalised for each person, clearly outlining the support required to guide staff in delivering appropriate care. Any changes in needs were promptly shared with the team, who showed a good understanding of each person’s support requirements.

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 showed a strong understanding of the people they supported and built positive, trusting relationships. This enabled them to deliver person-centred care in line with recognised best practice guidance.

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.

Essential care information was readily available to other healthcare professionals, such as during hospital transfers, supporting seamless continuity of care. Staff supported people with healthcare appointments, and clinicians had access to clear summaries of each person’s health status and support needs. This reduced the need for people to repeat information, lowering stress and helping to improve outcomes.

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.

A proactive, person-centred approach was taken to promote health and wellbeing. One person shared, “All of the staff are very nice. We have a laugh and a joke together.”

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 made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

The registered manager maintained oversight of healthcare monitoring, including tracking weight changes and seeking input from professionals when required. Fluid intake was monitored to ensure people remained adequately hydrated. Audits of accidents and incidents were routinely completed, enabling the registered manager to identify patterns and implement appropriate actions to improve outcomes for people.

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

Staff demonstrated an understanding of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). Individuals were supported to make day‑to‑day choices, with care delivered at a pace and in a manner that reflected their preferences. Where needed, staff provided appropriate support to assist with decision‑making.

The provider operated in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act. Capacity assessments and best interest decisions were completed in line with best practice. Where individuals were subject to restrictions on their liberty, appropriate Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) applications had been made or were in place, and people were supported in line with their agreed care plans.