Moorgate Croft

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.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated 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 and care was provided in line with people’s preferences. Care plans were reviewed monthly or sooner if required, to make sure the care provided kept pace with people’s changing needs.

People and their relatives were involved in planning and reviewing their care. People and relatives we spoke with gave positive feedback regarding the staff team involving them as partners in their care. One person said, “[Staff] talk to me. They ask if anything needs changing.” One relative said, “The staff understand [my family member]. They respect [my family member’s] needs and understand their views. They try to give [my family member] as much independence as they can.”

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.

The team undertook effective assessments of people’s needs and made sure their care reflected the latest legislation, standards, and evidence-based research. People and relatives told us staff were aware of people’s need and what was important to them. One relative described their family member’s specific concerns and preferences, saying, “[The staff] know [my family member] well. They are tuned into the important things.”

People were supported with their nutrition and hydration. The service promoted a varied diet and staff liaised with dieticians when needed. We saw nutritious snacks and drinks were provided in between meals. Our observation of the lunchtime meal were positive. Staff assisted people in a caring, discrete and supportive way, making sure people were enjoying their meals. People told us they were happy with the food provided. Their comments included, “The food is very, very good, and you get a choice” and “The food is ok and you get enough.” Relatives, comments included, “[My family member] is fussy and they will cook different things for them if I fetch it in. [My family member] does get well fed,” and “The food is excellent. I have seen some

lovely food.” Although, 1 person thought the food was nice, they said it was sometimes not as warm as they would have liked it to be.

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 and leaders worked closely with external professionals to make sure people’s care and support was consistent. Information was passed on to staff during handovers to make sure they were up to date with current information and events and any changes in people’s needs.

Staff told us they worked well as a team and had access to the information they needed to deliver people’s care. One staff member said, “We have good training and good communication.”

Information was shared between teams and partner services to help ensure continuity of care for people. A visiting health care professionals told us the staff team were open and honest, shared information appropriately and communicated well with them. They said staff, particularly the senior team, knew people well and the requests they made for input and support were always appropriate.

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. The provider’s systems and processes helped staff to identify and respond to changes in people’s health and wellbeing in a timely way. Where necessary, the team documented and monitored people’s wellbeing, such as their weight, diet and fluid intake, and skin integrity. Care documentation was kept up to date to show any trends and patterns and to review actions and progress where needed.

People told us they were supported to remain active and healthy. One person said, “There are always some activities. I have a daily walk.” They added, “[Staff] take my blood pressure and weigh me.” People confirmed they were supported to access healthcare services when needed. There were weekly GP reviews and records which showed staff worked closely with local community health services and were able to access advice and guidance promptly. A relative said, “The doctor comes every Thursday.”

The provider monitored all people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they fully met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. People’s

health and well-being was monitored, and any emerging healthcare needs were addressed in a timely way. We saw evidence of action staff and leaders had taken to improve outcomes for people. For example, good rehabilitation support had been provided to people, supported by professionals, such as specialist medical services, dietetics, speech and language therapy and physiotherapy. Monitoring of people’s wellbeing and referrals had been completed in a timely way and advice was followed and incorporated into people’s care plans.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Staff involved people in their care, offered choices to people and respected their decisions. Staff explained what they were doing and checked out how people felt about the task prior to proceeding.

Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) had been applied for as necessary. There was a process in place to track and monitor applications and when authorisations needed to be renewed. Mental capacity care plans were in place. Where people lacked capacity to consent to particular decisions, decisions were made in people’s best interests, following good practice guidance, and were regularly reviewed.