Gorton Mill House

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 inspection 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 67 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. Staff knew people’s individual needs and informed the service coordinator if people’s support needs changed. Relatives said they had been involved in agreeing and reviewing people's care plans.

The provider did not always plan and deliver people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. People’s dietary needs were known. Although 1 person’s dietary needs had not been updated following a recent review, staff were aware of the updated guidance. We discussed with the registered manager how people’s care plans needed to be updated promptly when people’s needs changed and not wait until the local authority assessments had been changed, as this could take a long time to complete. Relative’s feedback was mixed. We were told some staff did not always offer people a choice of meals or did not know how to prepare appropriate meals for people. This was thought to be due to cultural differences for some staff. A relative said, “Carers make [Name] a sandwich when they would prefer a microwave meal.” The registered manager was aware of this issue and had introduced a ‘food flip book’ to assist staff to prepare the meals people wanted. Staff had also worked together to prepare meals so they could learn from each other. The registered manager said they had not received any recent concerns about the meals prepared by staff.

The service 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 said they worked well together and communication within the team was good. A staff handover, communication book and WhatsApp group were used to share any changes in people’s support needs. Professionals were positive about working with Gorton Mill House. They said the service was responsive and had a good relationship with the housing and social work teams.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. People and relatives said staff would contact health professionals when needed. Staff had the health and social care professional contact details for each person. Where required, staff would support people to attend medical appointments.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. The service had set up and run a monthly wellbeing clinic. People could have their vital medical signs monitored so any changes could be acted upon promptly.

The service did not always ensure people had the appropriate communication and encouragement to make choices about their care and support. Staff said they sought people's consent by explaining what support they were going to provide and getting people's agreement. However, some relatives felt not all staff knew how to offer choices to people living with dementia. For example, asking a closed question like ‘do you want a shower’ allowing them to simply say ‘no’. Relatives reported this had occurred for several days in succession and resulted in the person refusing personal care. A relative said, “Carers just accept [Name’s] refusal for showers or everything. If they say no, they don’t try to persuade them and just leave them alone.” The registered manager told us additional dementia training had been completed in response to relatives’ feedback, and no similar concerns had been raised with them recently.