Brandon Lodge 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 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. People’s needs had been assessed when they were admitted to Brandon Lodge. The information gathered was used to develop care plans.

The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. People gave mixed feedback about the meals provided. A person commented, “The food is alright, it is the same every day though. I have no concerns.” Kitchen staff described how they adapted the meals to reflect people’s specific needs. A staff member commented, “I have made meal adjustments which were agreed by the manager, as needed.” Care plans described the support people needed in a range of areas, including eating and drinking.

Staff worked together and with other services to ensure people’s needs were met. When required, referrals were made to health professionals and their recommendations were followed. A relative commented their family member had specific health related needs, which other professionals were supporting alongside staff.

Care plans described the support people needed with regard to managing their health-related needs. A relative commented staff had helped improve their family member’s general physical health due to improved diet and paying attention to their medical and care needs.

The service did not always routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They did not always ensure that outcomes were positive and consistent, or that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. Further work was needed to ensure outcomes were routinely monitored and improvements were made as situations changed.

The service did not always tell people about their rights around consent and did not always respect their rights when delivering care and treatment. The provider was not following the MCA, as MCA assessments were routinely completed for some decisions, even though there were no doubts about people’s capacity to make those decisions themselves. Best interest decision had also not been completed for some people where they were unable to consent to restrictions placed on them, such as for bedrails. Care plans described how people should be supported with making decisions and choices. Staff confirmed they gained consent before providing care. A staff member said, “We ask them (people) first if they want to be assisted. If a resident does not have capacity, we act according to their best interest.”