Canterbury House 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

People and their loved ones were involved in their initial assessment with the relevant external healthcare professionals to ensure the service could meet the person’s needs. Staff worked alongside external healthcare providers to ensure that people remained as healthy as possible. Staff knew people well and supported them to achieve good outcomes. People’s consent to care was sought by staff, and those who were not able to consent had their rights protected and advocated for by appropriate others.

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, their friends and relatives were involved in the assessment of their needs and care plans reflected their preferences and involvement. People’s communication needs had been assessed and each person had a communication plan which included details of how best to engage with them. People’s health needs were assessed, and other professionals had been involved in assessments where necessary, such as dieticians or speech and language therapists. Staff used recognised assessment tools to assess some risks, such as skin integrity, malnutrition or deterioration in health. The provider had a mechanism in place for regularly reviewing people’s care records.

Staff delivered care to people in line with their planned care, using best practice guidelines. Staff told us they followed people’s care plans and involved other professionals in assessments where required, for example district nurses or speech and language therapists. The service had a series of fact sheets available covering a range of health conditions, such as Parkinson’s disease and diabetes. People were supported to eat and drink enough to meet their needs. Most people ate in the dining room where there were menus on display. Food preferences, allergies and intolerances were documented, and people were able to choose their meals. Staff used show plates to assist people to choose the meal they wanted. People who had shown signs of being at risk of choking, for example because they had experienced coughing episodes during meals, had been referred to the speech and language therapists (SaLT) for assessment and advice. We observed staff followed the advice given.

Relatives told us their loved one was supported to visit external healthcare providers when required. A healthcare professional told us they felt there was ‘good and timely communication and information sharing’ when this was required. Relationships with all partners had been strengthened over recent months for the benefit of people using the services. The management team and staff worked closely with other professionals to meet people’s needs. For example, the district nursing teams, staff from the GP surgery, dieticians and speech and language therapists. Staff had received additional training to support them to recognise signs of deterioration.

People had their health care needs assessed and had access to a range of health professionals if required. For example, the GP, a paramedic, specialist nurses or dieticians. Staff had good knowledge of people’s needs and knew how to support them to achieve good outcomes. Where possible some people were supported to manage their own care needs, for example, one person had a stoma that they had managed themselves for many years. This person was encouraged to continue this self-care as part of their care and support plan. Feedback from the 2024 survey showed that people felt they had been involved in their care and support. Staff supported people to make healthy food choices and monitored food and fluid intake if this was required.

People’s care plans included short- and long-term goals and these were reviewed regularly. People generally achieved good outcomes and people told us they liked living in Canterbury House. The provider had a positive learning culture where staff were encouraged to reflect and learn lessons from any adverse incidents. External healthcare professionals visited the service weekly to monitor people’s health with the support from care staff.

People told us and we observed staff asking people for their consent before carrying out any care or support tasks. People’s consent was documented within their care plans. Information was provided to people in a way they could understand. Staff highlighted risks to people who chose to make unwise decisions about their care, for example, one person had chosen to smoke. People had decision specific capacity assessments and best interest decisions were made where necessary. Where a person was deemed to lack capacity, applications had been made to deprive them of their liberty. A Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) tracker was in place to monitor expiry dates and conditions. The service worked closely with family, friends and advocates where necessary to ensure people had maximum choice and control.