Granville Gardens 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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered 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 62 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Although there were systems in place to assess and plan for people's needs, the provider did not always ensure these were effectively reviewed and reflective of people’s current needs and health conditions. For example, we identified 1 person’s care plan was not sufficiently updated to reflect their specific health condition to allow staff to effectively respond to a deterioration in their health.

We could not be assured the provider always planned and delivered people's care effectively. The provider had not identified that people's care plans were not always consistent or reflective of how to meet their needs. Care plans for people with complex medical conditions such as diabetes and epilepsy were in place for staff to support them. However, they did not allow safe person-centred care. For example, epilepsy care plans contained information about all types of seizures but not specific information about that person’s epilepsy, seizure type and frequency.

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 explained that health professionals regularly visited the home and staff could contact them in between times, for any urgent advice or treatment. People told us that staff supported them to access health and social care services.

The provider supported people to manage their health and well-being 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 told us, and staff confirmed, that staff supported people to access health and social care services which met people’s needs.

People’s care was monitored to help ensure they achieved positive outcomes. People gave positive feedback about living at the home. One person told us, “It’s turned out to be the best place for me.”

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Mental capacity assessment had been completed for most relevant decisions. However, we found some people had been assessed as lacking capacity based on a discussion with a staff member, but the discussion did not include all pertinent information to the decision. Also, we identified 1 person’s family were recorded as having legal authority to make the decisions regarding the areas of care which were being assessed. However there was no evidence in the assessment or the best interest’s decision the family had been involved.