Silver Birch 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 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. A pre-assessment meeting took place for everyone before they moved to the service. Management met with people and their relatives or advocates and assessed the persons’ care and support needs to make sure that the service had enough staff with appropriate training and skills to support them. Relatives told us they were fully involved in this process, one saying, “Everything was in place.” Pre-assessment information formed the basis of people’s care plans, and these were regularly reviewed to make sure any changes in needs were addressed. Staff told us they had regular competency checks to make sure they still had the knowledge to be able to provide the best care. People’s mental capacity was assessed according to need and any Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were applied for correctly. People’s care and treatment including their wellbeing was planned and delivered in line with current legislation and recognised best practice and standards. People, their families and or representatives were included in the process to reflect what was important and mattered to the person. A relative told us, “The care plan has been adjusted for [family member’s] agility. I was part of that.”

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

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 access medical professionals as and when required. One person commented, “Doctor came, not had the optician yet, dentist and chiropodist come.” Timely referrals were made when any issues were noted, for example to dieticians for weight loss, or tissue viability nurses for skin breakdown. Guidance was available for staff in managing weight loss in the absence of dietician involvement. Monitoring of people’s weight, skin integrity and other clinical areas, was completed through the use of recognised tools such as the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool and Waterlow pressure area risk assessment, with separate monitoring and oversight completed to identify issues, trends and record actions. The registered manager worked with a multidisciplinary healthcare team in supporting people’s health needs. This included GP involvement at the service and when needed other professionals such as dementia specialists, palliative care team and occupational therapists.People were supported to eat and drink well and were complimentary about the food, comments included, “Food is alright, get plenty of variations,” and “Food menu is good, always options.” As part of the site visit, we observed lunch at the service. The lunch time meal was a positive experience for people. For those who chose to eat in the dining rooms there were enough staff to assist them. Where people who needed one to one support to eat and drink, they received this without interruptions or distractions, including people who ate their meals in their rooms. Staff provided this support in a respectful and dignified way.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Staff understood the requirement to seek permission before providing care to people and consent was sought. Staff supported people to make decisions for themselves and offered them choice during all interactions. Staff had received training in mental capacity and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the MCA. In care homes, and some hospitals, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The registered manager was working within the principles of MCA and had applied for assessments and renewals of DoLS when required. Where people living at the service were unable to make their own decisions and there was no power of attorney in place, best interest meetings including specific decisions were in place, these were recorded and were kept under review.