The Gables 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. People’s needs were not always appropriately assessed, reviewed and this was not always recorded. People were seen to be involved in making choices, although their representatives were not always consulted.

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.

People told us they were not always involved in their care planning, including when their care was reviewed. One relative told us they do not feel that staff know their family member’s needs well. Relatives told us they do not feel staff know how to fully support people when they were displaying signs of distress, and therefore their needs were not always met in certain circumstances. This meant that people did not always receive effective support to have their personal care needs met.

Staff told us people’s care plans could be improved upon as they did not always contain key personalised information relating to the person. For example, their likes, dislikes and preferences. The registered manager acknowledged that care plans required reviewing to be more person centred and capture more information relating to the person.

Tools the provider had in place to monitor and assess people’s needs were not always used effectively. For example, we found people’s risk assessments stated for staff to use a pain monitoring tool to assess people’s level of pain prior to administering, ‘when required’ medicines. On review of people’s medicines administration record, we could see pain relief medicines had been administered, and the results of the pain assessment record had not been recorded.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

On the whole, most people we spoke with felt their consent was gained prior to staff supporting them. During on our onsite visit, we observed consent being sought prior to medicines being administered and prior to supporting a person with their mobility needs.

Staff and the management team showed understanding of mental capacity and supporting people to have decisions made in their best interest. The registered manager told us how they worked with people to recognise their ways of communicating, including nonverbal cues.

People’s care files we reviewed contained mental capacity assessments (MCA) for specific decisions relating to people’s care. These showed how the provider had taken reasonable adjustments to support people’s understanding. Although these assessments did demonstrate involvement of the person, there was no indication that people’s relatives or representatives were involved.