Castlethorpe Nursing 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 63 (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 were effective because they did not always check and discuss people’s health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.Care plans showed people’s needs were assessed and reviewed. Records showed risk assessment tools were used to identify people’s needs, including falls risk. However, the risks identified were not always linked with actions required to provide effective care for people. For example, a person who had recently had an operation had no information in their care plan for staff to follow to monitor their wound, or how to look for complications associated with their recent surgery. This meant that any infection or deterioration may not be identified timeously.

 

The provider did not always plan and deliver people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did not follow legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. We found care plans lacked clear guidance for staff to follow when supporting people. For example, a person’s care plan contained conflicting information regarding their ability to support themselves with eating and drinking. Care plans reflected the involvement of people and their families in the care planning process.

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 worked with healthcare professionals, including GPs, district nurses and therapists to support continuity and outcomes for people. When hospital treatment was required, the service used hospital passports to support the sharing of information.

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 were supported to maintain their health, attend appointments and engage in physical and social activities. Any changes or concerns were reported to the relevant healthcare professionals to ensure people received timely and appropriate support.

The provider did not always routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They did not always ensure that outcomes were positive and consistent, or that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. People’s care plans contained information on their care needs and actions required to provide care but lacked detail to support effective monitoring. For example, people requiring the use of equipment to move around the home had insufficient detail in their care plans for staff to follow. Goals noted in care plans did not have a process in place to determine whether these were being achieved. Audits and reviews of care plans were completed, but there was no associated action when areas for improvement were identified.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. The provider supported people to receive care in a way that respected their choices and involved them, where possible, in decisions about their day-to-day support. Care plans demonstrated that the Mental Capacity Act had been followed, and where necessary, a mental capacity assessment had been completed. Staff had received training around the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Relatives described staff seeking permission and explaining care, with one family member telling us, “Staff ask permission to help [Name] change position’.