Coppice Lea

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 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. People and those close to them were involved in initial and on-going assessments. Records were person centred and reflected what was important to the person.

Pre-admission assessments contained details of the person, their likes and dislikes, health conditions and all aspects of their lives. Based on this, a plan was devised on how to best support the person. Care plans were developed from the initial assessments and were regularly reviewed and updated as people’s needs changed.

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.

People’s nutritional needs were assessed, recorded and met. Most people were happy with the food on offer. Their comments included, “There’s a lot of food and it’s good quality”, “They obviously put a lot of care into it and the cook is passionate about [their] food” and “There’s almost too much food… It is good, we are well fed.” Relatives agreed and said, “The food is very good and the chef is excellent. [They] really care” and “Our relative seems to enjoy the food – it always smells good and there is plenty of it.”

The chef demonstrated a good awareness of different swallowing conditions and how this impacted people’s food intake. There was a large wall chart in the kitchen displaying people’s various dietary needs, which was updated on a daily basis. The chef took part in weekly and daily meetings, to discuss dietary changes and so they could adapt meals for individuals. For example, they enriched the meals of some people who had low nutritional intake and were at risk of losing weight. The chef told us they focused on ensuring all kitchen staff knew how to meet people’s nutritional needs.

The kitchen was clean and there was a good stock of fresh food in the fridge. Food items were clearly labelled with dates and allergens. A recent food and hygiene inspection had awarded the home the highest score of 5.

The provider and the chef made sure people’s mealtimes was pleasurable and met their choices and needs. The chef said people were consulted about their preferences and this was considered when deciding the menu. People were able to request options outside the menu and this was provided. For example, a jacket potato or an omelette. There was a variety of drinks and snacks available in different areas of the home so people could help themselves in between meals and at night, and these were replenished regularly.

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.

Staff told us they enjoyed working at the home and there was a very good culture and supportive teamwork. One staff member told us, “Staff morale is high in the home. Everyone is happy as they are valued and listened to. We have a very friendly work environment here.” They added, “I feel valued and can make a difference. I have been able to grow myself here.”

People told us staff worked well together and communicated with them well in order to meet their needs.

The service worked closely with other agencies and professionals to help ensure a more holistic approach to people’s health and wellbeing. The registered manager told us, “We maintain regular communication with external agencies through multidisciplinary team meetings, ensuring coordinated care planning and timely interventions. Feedback and learning from these partnerships are disseminated within the team through internal meetings and training updates, fostering a culture of shared knowledge and continuous improvement and development.”

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 told us their healthcare needs were met and their choices respected. One relative stated, “Even though my [family member] is here on respite care they have got to know [them]. The support is good. We as [their] family feel supported too” and another said, “They try to encourage [family member] to do as much as [they] can for [themselves] but if [they] need help they are there.”

People were supported to access a range of health care professionals. Care records contained detailed information about people’s health conditions and how these might affect people. There were regular visits from health care professionals involved in people’s care, and communication between them and the staff and management was effective.

Health care professionals said the staff and management team worked closely with them and communication was good.

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.

People said their healthcare needs were met. One person told us, “I would like to see an optician.” On the day of our inspection, the optician was visiting the service. We saw the person’s name was on their list. The person was happy to confirm later they had been seen.

The staff team were vigilant and ensured people received effective care so they remained as healthy as possible. For example, one person who had developed a chronic skin condition was being supported by the tissue viability nurse for wound care management. There was a wound care plan and risk assessment in place which contained detailed instruction for staff to manage the condition, such as leg washing, leg elevation and exercises.

Another person who was living with diabetes was being supported by trained staff to monitor their blood sugar levels and had regular reviews with the diabetic nurse and the GP. This helped ensure they remained healthy and in control of their condition.

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

The provider was meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People told us staff asked for their consent and involved them in decisions about their care and support. They said their choices were respected. The staff received training in the principles of MCA and understood these.

The registered manager ensured people consented to their care and treatment where they could do so. Staff recorded people’s capacity regarding different decisions. The records we reviewed were clear and detailed.