Elm Park 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

We assessed all quality statements for this key question. Our rating for this question remains good. People received support to manage their health and the staff team worked in partnership with healthcare professionals to meet people’s needs. People were asked for their consent before care and support was provided, and where necessary people’s capacity to make decisions about their care was assessed and recorded. People’s needs and preferences were assessed, and care and support was delivered in line with current standards. The provider made sure staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care. People were supported to maintain a balanced diet. People’s needs were met by the adaption, design and decoration of the home.

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 their relatives told us staff were aware of people’s need and what was important to them. We saw feedback received from one relative who wrote, “I would like to thank [the head of care] who in my opinion is outstanding at her job and a great asset to the home as she ensures that all the carers are offering best practice and models this herself by both meaningful daily interactions with all the residents alongside her office duties and all the residents recognise and respond well to her. I would also like to mention [2 members of the care team] whose warmth and care towards the residents stands out. I am very grateful to all the staff and management at Elm Park for the love and care they give to Mum and myself daily and I know Mum would want me to write this and so this comes from not just myself as a daughter, but my Mum too.” People were complimentary about the food. People’s responses included, “The food is excellent”, “The food is handmade, extremely well made” and “They’ll [staff] ask me what I want. They’re very accommodating”.

Staff knew people well and were able to describe their current needs and how best to support them. Staff told us they had enough information about people and were kept up to date with any changes in people’s needs. For example, during daily meetings, so that the personal care they supplied always met peoples’ needs. Staff and managers were aware of the correct practice to follow when supporting people to make decisions. They completed training covering the Mental Capacity Act and good practice in relation to people’s rights.

The support people required was assessed prior to admission to make sure people’s needs could be met by the service. Pre-admission assessments included information in areas such as people’s healthcare needs and preferred methods of communication. People’s needs were reviewed to make sure records were up to date, so staff were able to support people in the most appropriate way.

People and their relatives told us staff were aware of people’s need and what was important to them. We saw feedback received from one relative who wrote, “I would like to thank [the head of care] who in my opinion is outstanding at her job and a great asset to the home as she ensures that all the carers are offering best practice and models this herself by both meaningful daily interactions with all the residents alongside her office duties and all the residents recognise and respond well to her. I would also like to mention [2 members of the care team] whose warmth and care towards the residents stands out. I am very grateful to all the staff and management at Elm Park for the love and care they give to Mum and myself daily and I know Mum would want me to write this and so this comes from not just myself as a daughter, but my Mum too.” People were complimentary about the food. People’s responses included, “The food is excellent”, “The food is handmade, extremely well made” and “They’ll [staff] ask me what I want. They’re very accommodating”.

All managers and staff we spoke with were familiar with people’s individual and specific needs. They told us people were involved the assessment, planning and delivery of their care so their views and preferences were properly reflected in their care plans.

People’s care was coordinated, so when advice about health, care and support was required, it was readily accessible for people. Staff were able to seek advice from other professionals about people’s care needs as needed. The management team worked well with partners to ensure they were up to date with good practice and required standards. People had enough to eat and drink to maintain their health and wellbeing. Effective processes were in place to make sure people’s views and preferences were sought and acknowledged in relation to their care. People’s needs, views and preferences were clearly reflected in their care plans.

People and their relatives spoke positively about the staff team. One person said, “The staff are very good indeed. I’ve one or two I consider friends.” One person’s relative said, “[The admission process] seemed really smooth.” They added, “I trust [staff] now to still bend over backwards to ensure what I want, as well as what is best for mum.” People and their relatives told us people had access to information and to other services, such as healthcare services, when needed.

Staff told us they had access to the information they needed to assess, plan and deliver people’s care. Members of the management team told us information was shared with other relevant teams and services. This helped to make sure there was continuity of care for people when they used and moved between services.

Partner professionals confirmed they worked with the service to make sure people received the support they needed. For instance, we saw feedback from a partner professional, who wrote, “Following my working with Elm Park over the past 12 month with a particular case I wanted to put in writing the support and partnership working being much appreciated. Communication on progress and developments with myself as the person’s social worker has been invaluable and the care home’s acute responses to need and identification of changes has been pivotal in ensuring the person was seen and supported by the appropriate acute services at the time. Staff’s commitment and resilience has been noted throughout during times of difficulty and presenting needs and working with myself to explore further options.”

New staff received training as part of their induction, ongoing training to support them in their roles, and training tailored to the specific needs of people who used the service. Nursing staff received appropriate training to enable them to provide appropriate care and treatment. Staff had access to people’s care records to support their delivery of care. People’s care plans included the support they required to sustain and promote their independence. For example, any aids and equipment used to support them with eating and drinking and with moving around the home.

People told us they had access to health services when needed. One person told us about their glasses and seeing an optician. They said, “Someone involved with it gets to see me, it’s not people who work here full time, they bring people in to do it.” A relative said, “If there is ever anything that needs attention, or if I (as a lay person) have any health worries about my mum, they are addressed very quickly after I have asked the question.” Another relative told us the home had provided a particular kind of knife and fork to help their loved one to eat independently, with more ease. They added, “There’s cake all day.”

Staff supported people to manage their health conditions whilst respecting people’s choices and rights. Staff said there was a GP linked to the home who was in regular contact and would arrange additional observations and treatment if needed. For instance, if people were at risk of poor nutrition or hydration staff monitored people's food and fluid intake and weight, and sought advice from health care services such as dieticians.

Staff worked closely with local community health services and were able to access advice and guidance promptly. There were weekly reviews with a local GP surgery, which also supported the service in gaining input from a range of community healthcare professionals.

People spoke positively about the support they received and felt their needs were being met. When speaking of staff monitoring people’s health and wellbeing, a relative told us staff were good at making sure, “the basics” were completed, such as checking their loved one’s food and fluid intake.

Staff told us of a range of areas they monitored to support people’s health and wellbeing based on people’s individual needs. Staff and managers said there were positive relationships between the home and staff at the GP surgery, who they worked with to monitor and improve people’s health outcomes.

The provider’s monitoring systems and processes helped staff to identify and respond to changes in people’s health and wellbeing in a timely way. The provider had effective processes in place to monitor people’s care and treatment, wellbeing and the care people received. This included reviews of people’s care records and discussion with people and those close to them.

People told us they were involved in decisions around their care and people were comfortable and relaxed with the staff attending them. During this assessment we saw staff were asking for people’s consent.

Staff had a good understanding of supporting people to make informed decisions. They understood people may need time to consider their decisions, and were entitled to change their mind. Where people did not have capacity to make a particular decision, this was recorded and decisions had been made in their best interests.

The provider had systems to ensure any restrictions in place were lawful and monitored. Staff were provided with training in the Mental Capacity Act. Records showed people provided consent in relation to their care and treatment where they had the capacity to do so. Where people were unable to make their own decisions, records of best interest meetings and specific decisions were in place. People were enabled to access support from independent advocates.