Crimson Manor

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’s needs were assessed prior to admission and relatives told us they were involved in reviews.

Care records contained detailed and personalised information reflecting people's individual needs, preferences and desired outcomes. A particularly positive feature of the records was the inclusion of a 'desired outcome' section, which captured what was important to the person in their own words. This helped to ensure care was tailored to the person's preferences, expectations and individual goals.

A pre-admission assessment had been completed for the most recent admission which included detailed information about medical and care needs, and personal history.

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.

Recognised assessment tools such as the malnutrition universal screening tool (MUST) were in place. Signage was in place to help people living with dementia find their way around and locate their rooms. Care plans provided information about people's nutrition and hydration needs. People said they enjoyed the food.

People were offered, and enjoyed, plenty of food and drinks throughout the day. Menus changed seasonally and provided a choice of meals for all, including any specialist diets. The chef was very knowledgeable about people’s nutritional needs, all meals were home-made, including freshly baked bread each day.The service was also in the process of reapplying for accreditation through the Food for Life programme.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. Processes were in place to ensure joint working within the staff team and with other professionals. Communication systems ensured staff were informed of any changes in people’s care and support. Staff explained there was a clear allocation of responsibilities during shifts and said staff supported one another to ensure people received the care and support they needed. This was evidenced in our observations.

One of the registered managers described positive working relationships with external professionals involved in people's care. They highlighted a strong partnership with the chiropody service, which helped support people's ongoing foot care needs. Records evidenced collaborative working with other health and social care professionals whose advice was incorporated into care plans, providing clear instructions for staff to support safe care and treatment.

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's physical health needs were monitored appropriately. Weight records were maintained and showed evidence of referrals to, and involvement from, relevant healthcare professionals where concerns had been identified. Food and fluid intake was routinely recorded and monitored. Records demonstrated people were receiving appropriate levels of nutrition and hydration and showed that individual dietary preferences were recognised and met. Where required, food fortification plans were in place to support people at risk of poor nutritional intake. Overall, records evidenced a proactive approach to monitoring people's health and wellbeing and supporting positive 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.

Care records showed people's health care was monitored and appropriate action was taken when concerns were identified.

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

Overall, staff offered choices and sought people’s consent before providing care and support. Care plans provided information about capacity and consent.

Where there was reason to doubt a person had capacity to give consent, mental capacity assessments were in place for some decisions. However, we found there was no decision specific capacity assessment for 2 people who had sensors in place to alert staff when the person left their bed. This was addressed on the second day of our assessment.