Claremont 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

During our assessment of this key question, we found people’s needs were assessed which supported staff to develop person centred plans. People and relatives told us their needs were met, and this was observed during staff practices. Care plans included detailed information about people’s health conditions and support they required with their nutrition. People and their relatives told us the food in the home was good and people were supported with meals when required. People told us when needed they had access to health professionals and this was monitored through daily meetings, care reviews and involvement with relevant healthcare professionals. The appropriate policies and procedures were in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Any restrictions in place were in the best interests of the person. However, we found staff’s knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 was not always robust.

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.

We did not receive concerns from people or relatives in relation to this area.

The provider used recognized good practice tools and assessment templates to help make sure their assessments were detailed enough to develop person centred plans.

There were processes in place to ensure people's needs were assessed before being admitted to the service. In our review of meeting minutes held between the management team and nursing staff, we saw the team discussed and monitored this documentation being completed in a timely way.

In our conversations with people and relatives, we were told people's needs were met. Comments included, "I feel happier today. I’ve been here a few months. I feel safe, I don’t worry about anything."

Staff told us they had accessed training that helped them better understand people's needs. For example, a staff member told us how much they had enjoyed their last dementia training because "we felt in their shoes", referring to people who lived at the home who were living with dementia.

People received evidence-based care and treatment. Staff had received training and had information to help them understand people’s different needs and how to meet them. We observed staff's practice and found they supported people depending on their needs. For example, for people living with dementia, staff used show plates for people to choose their meal.

We did not receive concerns from people or relatives in relation to this area.

In our conversations with the management team, they told us concerns had been raised from healthcare professionals. The home manager told us they wanted to rebuild relationships with GP practices covering the home. We observed a sign had been put in place at the front door to ensure visiting healthcare professionals were attended to in a timely way when they visited the home.

Visiting healthcare professionals told us the provider worked well with them to meet the needs of people.

We found there were processes and procedures in place to ensure people's needs were being met by staff and, when required, other healthcare professionals were involved such as GP, dieticians and SALT.

People told us the food provided by the home was good. Their comments included, "My breakfast was very nice" and “They do a lovely porridge." A relative told us, "The food looks good."

In our conversations with staff, they were knowledgeable about people's nutritional needs and preferences. A staff member described us, "[Person] has a normal diet and is vegetarian, we always ask [person], he has capacity, we need to keep checking on person if in [their] bedroom. We try our best if [person] is not eating, we go in [their] bedroom and we check every 15 min."

Care plans included detailed information about people’s health conditions and support they required with their nutrition. Healthcare professionals such as dieticians and SALTs had been involved in planning people's care.

People told their care was good and that they could access healthcare professionals when they needed them. Their comments included, "They get the doctor for you” and "I have been unwell with a bad chest and a pain in my leg, they got the doctor for me.”

Care and nursing staff, alongside the management team, monitored people's health through daily meetings to discuss people's presentation, review of people's care and involvement with relevant healthcare professionals.

The provider had systems in place to ensure people's outcomes were met. These were planned in people's care plans and monitored via regular care reviews.

Most people shared positive feedback about their experience of care and told us they were able to make choices about their care. Their comments included, "They are all very nice. The home is lovely" and "The staff are very nice, they look after me. They make me something to eat if I ask."

In our conversations with staff, we found their knowledge of the application of the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 was not always robust. Some staff members were confident about this area, other staff members were not. Their comments included, "I think [MCA] it's about when people can't make decisions about thing"; "Some residents have capacity so they can choose to do what they want to do others don’t and cant choose" and "So everyone is deemed to have capacity unless proven otherwise." All staff had completed online training in this area. We discussed this with the home manager and they told us that moving forward this would be checked regularly. In our observations of care, we did not find concerns about staff's approach in relation to seeking consent or acting in people's best interests. The management team understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). They told us how people were consulted and involved in their care, and if appropriate their relatives, and if people lacked capacity to make decisions about their care, assessments of people's mental capacity were completed and decisions made in their best interests.

We reviewed the home’s policies and procedures to check whether the home was working within the principles of the MCA. The appropriate policies and procedures were in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Any restrictions in place were in the best interests of the person.