Regency 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 Inadequate. 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 71 (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 people’s health, care, wellbeing and communication needs.

People’s needs were assessed and reviewed regularly. Clinical assessment tools were used to support the assessment of needs and review including pressure care.

Care plans contained detailed information on clinical needs including diabetes and skin care which included information on symptoms of deterioration and when to request further medical advice.

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.

Care and treatment reflected current best practice and guidance which included how to meet people’s diverse needs regarding nutrition. The provider used recognised best practice assessment tools including assessments of an individual's risk of developing pressure ulcers and assessing an individual’s risk of malnutrition. People received support to ensure the risk of skin damage was minimised and wound healing was managed.

We observed lunchtime on the first day of our assessment. People received assistance where they required it, adaptations had been made to assist people to eat independently and portion sizes were good, with people offered additional food if they wanted it. Staff told us that people’s cultural needs would be catered for.

People were happy with the food provided. A person said, “It’s nice, very nice and homemade. They ask us in the morning and we get a choice, but they’ll do something else if you ask. They’re nice puddings.” Another person said, “It’s lovely.”

People were offered choices and staff were responsive to their wishes. A person said, “I’m on a normal diet though not a big eater. They’ll do me anything else I fancy if it gets me eating.” A staff member said, “We keep giving [a person who used the service] everything she asks for until she eats something.”

People told us that they were satisfied with the available drinks. A person said, “The trolley comes round a few times a day or they’ll bring me a drink.” Another person said, “I have plenty - they tell me to have lots to drink. I usually have a drink on the go.” A third person said, “I get given lots of drinks.” Food and fluids were monitored and people’s weights were also monitored.

Staff were confident in referring to other organisations. People received effective monitoring of their health and where concerns were observed, appropriate referrals to partner healthcare partners were made in a timely way.

A professional commented, ‘The care home is usually compliant with following our recommendations and chasing delivery of treatments on the same day. On occasion we have had to discuss things that may have been missed, but this is generally infrequent. The senior staff members are usually the staff that we deal with when visiting are very helpful with a collateral history.’

Staff described good communication within the service and that managers were described as knowledgeable and approachable.

The provider did not always support people to manage their health and wellbeing, so people could not always maximise their independence, choice and control.

Staff did not always support people to live healthier lives, or where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. External health and social care professionals were involved as required. However, there was currently no dental care offered for people in the service, though one person had visited a dental practice. The service was working to source this dental support. We also saw that a person had requested an optician but this did not appear to have happened. The manager agreed to review this.

People told us of visits made by external professionals. A person said, “The nurse came in to do our flu jabs. The chiropodist comes to check my feet.” Another person said, “The doctor came last week on his rounds and said to ask if I’ve any worries.” A relative said, “She’s had swollen legs and ankles just lately and the doctor has seen her and given her some water tablets now.”

Staff completed training to support people to manage their health and wellbeing, including diabetes awareness.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it.

Outcomes were monitored and used to drive improvement. Monitoring tools were used to identify and then monitor any emerging healthcare needs and external professionals were involved in helping to address these needs.

Team meetings, supervisions and regular reviews of people’s care all considered outcomes and how to improve outcomes for people.

A professional commented, ‘The communication between myself and them is absolutely fine, I visit each month but they will make contact with me if they need me in the interim. Each time I visit, staff will spend time with me and they always take on advice and support.’

People’s consent was sought and respected.

People told us that staff respected their choices. A person said, “They talk to me. They ask: ‘Do you want me to wash you?’” Another person said, “Oh yes, they don’t just get on with things without letting me know first.”

We observed staff asking consent before attaching clothing protectors at lunch, before removing plates, and transferring people into a wheelchair.

Policies were in place and mental capacity was considered where appropriate. Advanced decisions were clearly documented in care records.

Staff demonstrated an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act. Staff had completed training on consent and the Mental Capacity Act.