John Masefield House - Care Home with Nursing Physical Disabilities

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 received care that was based on their assessed individual needs. Records showed people and their relatives were involved in planning and regular reviewing of care. Improvements had been made and people had better access to other services. We saw people had a pleasant dining experience which offered a variety of appetising homemade food choices available at times that suited people's preferences. The menu was overseen, and food prepared by a catering team who knew people’s needs very well. Staff supported people to maintain food and fluid intakes. Improvements had been made and people had access to hydration stations all over the home. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Staff had a particularly good understanding of when the principles of the Mental Capacity Act should be applied.

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 told us they received care and support that was centred around their assessed needs, choices as well as decisions and were involved throughout the process. They were positive about the involvement of their relatives and advocates which ensured all aspects of their needs were addressed.

The provider told us improvements had been made and care planning focussed on people’s assessed needs. People’s assessments had been reviewed to ensure all needs had been captured. This gave staff more information for targeted care planning.

The provider had introduced processes which ensured assessments of people’s needs were comprehensive. People’s records showed a streamlined process from first contact to admission. These assessments were audited as part of the records and improvements made accordingly.

People told us they were involved in the planning and reviewing of their care. Comments included, “They talk to me and my relative about what I need” and “Yes they talk to me about my care plan.” People had a pleasant dining experience which offered a variety of appetising homemade food choices available at times that suited people's preferences. The menu was overseen, and food prepared by a catering team who knew people’s needs very well. Staff supported people to maintain food and fluid intakes in a dignified manner.

Staff told us care was planned and delivered in line with current evidence-based guidance, standards, best practice and legislation. This was monitored to ensure consistency of practice.

The provider’s processes were linked and in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. This allowed staff to provide up to date care aimed at improving people’s outcomes. Policies were in place and updated whenever there were changes in practice.

People told us improvements had been made and they were supported to access other services effectively. One person said, “I see a physio and do exercises with the staff. They arrange from here to take me to the JR hospital for my checkups.”

The provider told us they had made improvements and worked effectively across teams and services to support people. This enabled continuity of care and better outcomes for people. Staff told us they had positive collaborations with other health care professionals.

Healthcare professionals who often worked with the service were positive about the improvements made which enabled people to move between services. They said, “I have seen improvement in those areas as well. I have requested nurses to follow up on wheelchair referrals and few spasticity clinic referrals, they have done those and feedback me appropriately.”

People’s records showed they had up to date hospital passports which allowed information sharing between professionals. Records of staff rotas showed these were adjusted to accommodate people's outside visits.

People told us they were supported to manage their health and well-being. They told us improvement in staffing levels allowed them to be more independent and have better choice and control. For example, people had more outside community visits when they wanted to.

The provider told us they had made changes to enable people to have more control of their lives. Availability of equipment had improved and there were enough staff to support people with individual needs.

There were systems in place which enabled people to manage their health and wellbeing so they could maximise their independence, choice and control. People and staff input was often sought to ensure people's choices were respected.

People were positive about their care and told us their expectations were met. They had more opportunities to do things that mattered to them such as individual activities and days out with families. People told us they were involved in the planning and reviewing of their care.

Staff told us the improvements that have been made allowed them to meet people’s expectations of good care and better outcomes. Staff championed care roles such as dignity, infection control and safeguarding with the aim of meeting people's expectations.

The provider had made significant improvements and ensured people’s risks, risk management and care plans were up to date, person centred and often reviewed. There was emphasis on continuously monitoring people’s care and ensuring better outcomes.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People commented, “I can get up and go to bed when I feel like it and I can choose what activity I do. Can have a wash when I want” and “Always give me a choice of whether they do care or not and ask me If I want to go to bed. I can choose if I stay in my room or go to the activity room or the lounge. They never make you do something you don’t want to.”

Staff told us people were supported in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). Staff had received training about the MCA and understood how to support people in line with the principles of the Act. One staff member told us, “I support them to make their own decisions. Make choices for food and clothing.”

People’s rights to make their own decisions were respected and people were in control of their support. Care plans contained consent to use photographs and documents were signed by people or their legal representatives. Where people were thought to not have capacity to make certain decisions, capacity assessments had been carried out. Where capacity was not evident to make specific decisions, best interest decisions had been made and management and staff followed the correct process to do so.