Edwardian 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 assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement.

This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.

This service scored 62 (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 did not always make sure people’s care and treatment was effective.

It was evident from the care records that regular reviews took place. However, we identified people’s plans were not always up to date, with several risk assessment and personalised care plans missing as well as contradictory information across different care records.

People’s needs were assessed before they came to the service, and we saw this information was transferred to people’s care and support plans. However, for some people, the information was limited when they first moved into the service, but new information was gathered from relatives over time.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

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.

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.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

The service did not always work in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

The provider had failed to follow the principles of the MCA. Although mental capacity assessments were completed for most known decisions; we identified several mental capacity assessments had not been completed in relation to decisions around medicines, one to one staff support, safety monitoring equipment that could affect their privacy. We identified other mental capacity assessments that had only been partly completed and did not always include information such as who had been involved in making decisions on behalf of people. We also found the registered manager had not explored people’s mental capacity variations at various times of the day.

Staff were able in the main to share their understanding of the MCA and how this could affect the support provided to people. However, some staff were not familiar with the 5 principles of the MCA.