Archived: Clitheroe 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 and relatives were involved in people’s needs assessments. A relative told us, “I am fully aware of [person’s] care plan and if we feel something needs changing or reviewing, we just have to mention it to [registered manager].”

The provider ensured people’s needs were comprehensively assessed and included consideration of their physical, mental, health, social and communication needs. Information in people’s care plans was robust and included a good level of detail. A digital care planning system ensured information was easily accessible to staff and was used to record care interventions.

Assessments were regularly reviewed and updated to make sure information was up to date and support met people’s care needs. Care plans evidenced regular reviews; and conversations were held with people monthly to discuss any required changes.

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.

The registered manager and staff had a good understanding of current legislation, expected standards and good practice. Policies were reviewed regularly, and information was updated, with staff being reminded to check for changes to guidance. The registered manager attended forums to keep themselves up to date about new requirements within the social care sector, and shared information with the team.

Staff ensured people’s nutritional and hydration needs were met in line with good practice, and people had enough to eat and drink to prevent malnutrition and dehydration. Detailed information about people’s nutrition and hydration needs and preferences was included in care plans, with the associated assessments for any dietary risks. For example, for those with diabetes, or swallowing difficulties. Digital care records included information about people’s food intake and evidenced fluids were offered in line with the recommended levels.

The registered manager had good oversight of the home’s mealtime experience, conducting observations to ensure people’s needs and preferences were being met. We received positive feedback about the standard of meals and options available. A person living in the home said, “The food is really good and freshly cooked.” Another added, “It is all cooked in our own kitchen which is good, and the cook always comes to ask what I would like.”

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 sent digital messages to share important information with staff, and daily handover meetings were held to allocate tasks and discuss changes to people’s health and wellbeing.

Staff ensured communication with healthcare partners was effective, and they were proactive at working with others when multidisciplinary involvement was needed. A healthcare partner told us, “Information is clear and current, and handovers are conducted effectively to ensure ongoing care for [people]. The information provided allows me to understand and assess the needs of the individuals effectively.” They went on to add, “Staff and leaders at the service are responsive to concerns, advice and guidance and will make changes where required.”

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.

Staff supported people to make healthier choices to their diet and physical activity. A staff member told us, “There is an exercise session once a week, and we work with physiotherapists and occupational therapists to support people with exercises.” Another added, “[Person] is overweight, so we promote a healthier diet and give healthier options such as fruit.” Monitoring tools evidenced this had contributed to a significant weight loss over several months.

The home ensured risks to people’s health and wellbeing were identified early, working with healthcare partners to ensure people had access to the necessary treatment. Relatives confirmed people were referred to the GP when required, and weekly ward rounds were conducted at the home, meaning new or ongoing health conditions could be assessed and treated quickly. At the time of our inspection community nurses were carrying out annual health checks.

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 ensured there were effective approaches to monitor people’s care and treatment. Regular monitoring was in place for those who needed it. For example, food and fluid intake, Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) scores and body maps. Monitoring tools were reviewed by the registered manager, with concerns being escalated to the relevant healthcare partners in a timely manner. A healthcare partner told us, “[Staff] monitor residents and provide observations when required.”

Care plans were outcome focused, and the registered manager explained how they advocated for people to secure the help they needed to ensure positive outcomes. For example, liaising with the local authority to request additional funding for a person living at the home, which had contributed to a reduction in falls.

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

Staff completed training in The Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005, to aid their understanding of people’s rights around decision making, and people confirmed they sought consent. A person living at the home said, “The staff are all very polite and check with me before doing anything.”

The provider generally ensured assessments and decisions around consent were appropriately recorded. When required, assessments and best interest decision making records were in place, and people’s capacity to consent was documented in their care plans. Consent forms were completed, and if people did not have the capacity to consent, their next of kin had been involved as per good practice.

However, there were some inconsistencies relating to capacity within 1 person’s care plan. Following feedback, the registered manager reviewed and amended information immediately.