Morton Close

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 a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. We rated the service Good. The provider had a process to assess people before they were admitted. Overall monitoring processes were in place to ensure people received effective care and support. Processes were in place to ensure people’s capacity was assessed and staff demonstrated an understanding of the principles of consent.

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.

People and relatives confirmed they had a good experience when moving into Morton Close. One person said, “The staff went through things and answered any questions I had.”

The manager told us they had made improvement to how people were assessed before they moved into the home. This had recently highlighted situations where the home was not able to meet people’s needs safely. The manager told us they had made recent changes and was now leading on any new referrals.

The provider had an admissions policy in place and pre-assessments were completed. However, they could be improved to include further detail. We saw one person’s assessment had not been signed or dated which meant we could not be assured this had been completed prior to their admission .

People and relatives told us they felt they received good care and support and what was important to them mattered.

Staff gave feedback on how they monitored people’s care and understood the importance of this. One staff member said, “This means we can check if we have been doing things properly and gives information to other professionals.” The manager confirmed they had made recent changes to how they monitored people’s care including increased detailed monitoring of people’s care records.

The provider had a robust process for monitoring the fluid intake of people in the home. This was effective and showed good, safe amounts of fluid being offered and taken by people. Weights were being monitored in the service and only a few people were noted to have lost weight recently. However, the provider did not have effective systems in place to monitor and review the food intake of people who had lost weight. No harm had come to anyone because of the lack of monitoring; however, the risk of continued weight loss and potential malnutrition was evident for some people in the home. The manager was responsive to our findings and confirmed they would be implementing improved monitoring of the food intake charts We were assured appropriate action would be taken by their response.

People and relatives said the staff team worked effectively with each other and other professionals. One relative said, “There does not seem to be any undercurrents at all, everyone works well together.”

The manager and staff told us teamwork was good. They described recent improvements and good morale and said this had a positive impact on the quality of care and support people received. One staff member said, “There have been a lot of changes, everybody helps now and we are getting things done. We are definitely getting there.” The manager described improved working relationships with other professionals. They said, “We are working as a team. I am asking for more help, and we have moved forwards a lot.”

Overall feedback from stakeholders was positive and they described recent improvements in team working.

The provider had an effective system in place to capture and document the involvement of other professionals in the care and treatment of people in the home. In all care files we reviewed we found they contained detailed documentation showing an effective working relationship with health and social care professionals. Records showed people were accessing external services including the dentist and chiropodists.

Feedback from people and relatives was generally positive although we received several comments people would like to spend more time outdoors to promote their health and wellbeing. A relative said, “I think it would be lovely if people were taken outside more.”

Staff told us they actively promoted a healthy lifestyle. People were supported to participate in activities, such as armchair exercises.

The GP visited the home weekly and processes were in place to support people to access healthcare appointments. Records showed referrals were made in a timely way where external advice was required.

People and relatives gave us examples of how the care and support they had received had led to improvements in their health and well-being. One relative said, “[Name of relative] does not need the anxiety medication at all since they came here. They are much more awake and chattier now which is lovely.”

The manager and staff gave us examples of how people had made improvements as a result of their care and monitoring arrangements. A staff member said, “There was 1 lady who was on food supplements when she came. Staff took time to encourage them to eat and helped and she put on weight and did not need food supplements anymore.”

Processes were in place to monitor and improve people’s outcomes. Most people and relatives had completed surveys to give feedback on their care and support.

Overall people and relatives told us staff asked for consent before providing care and support, and choices were respected. One relative said, “When they take [name of relative] to the toilet you can hear them say how they will get them out of the chair and how to use the walking frame. It is like a running commentary.”

Staff demonstrated an understanding of capacity and consent and were able to share examples from their practise.

Consents were in place in care plans and signed by people where appropriate. Where people were unable to contribute fully family representatives had been involved. Consents were update to date and reviewed regularly. Where people did not have capacity, assessments had been completed and decisions made in their best interests had been effectively assessed, involving their representatives.