Barton Brook 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 found people’s needs were assessed on admission and reviewed at regular intervals. Daily handovers took place, where people’s changing needs were discussed. Staff had access to care plans and could review any documented changes to people’s needs through the app on hand-held devices. Care plans reflected input and advice from other health professionals, including Tissue Viability Nurses (TVN) and Speech and Language Therapists (SaLT). The service documented evidence of referrals to other professionals. The home monitored people’s weight, and any concerns were reported to the appropriate professional. A good relationship had been established between the home and GP, with weekly GP visits taking place. The home offered a variety of menu choices and the kitchen were aware of specific diets. We received mixed feedback about the food and choices on offer.

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 had been involved and consulted before moving into the home. Relatives told us they had also been involved and had contributed in planning the care with their relation. Relatives were confident people were receiving the right support from staff. One relative told us, “I do not have any concerns and when I leave the home after visiting, I know my loved one is well looked after and cared for.”

Staff told us they had access to care assessments and other relevant records prior to a person being admitted to Barton Brook care home. Staff told us following admission they observed and chatted with people to learn more about them, and how they preferred their support. This information was added into care plans so that all staff remained informed.

Processes were in place so that senior staff could assess people using different clinical tools. These were recorded on electronic systems so staff could see current needs. Moving and handling assessments had been completed; falls risk assessments indicated the level of risk and were being used to monitor the risk of falls. A malnutrition universal screening tool (MUST) was being used to identify those people most at risk of malnutrition so that appropriate action could be taken, for example fortified diets could be provided or supplements could be prescribed.

People gave us mixed feedback about the food. Comments included, “The food is really good; I’ve never left a meal yet”, “It’s a bit repetitive but it’s tasty and nourishing.” A third person described it as ‘hit and miss’, whilst another considered the food to be nice, and told us they could have more if they wanted. People’s nutrition and hydration needs were met but could be improved with evidence of increased consultation with people in the development of the menus. Alternatives were always available, and we did see some people receive meal options which were not on the menu. Snacks were offered at regular intervals of the day.

Both care staff and kitchen staff were aware of the various types of diet people received. Where people received a specialised diet to aid swallowing or weight management information was shared appropriately. Staff told us they had been given information on dysphagia diets and received training on how to correctly prepare thickened fluids.

Electronic care records indicated where people required a fortified or modified diet and were accessible by staff using handheld devices. Catering staff were told of people’s dietary needs on admission and following any changes. Assessments were in place for all people which highlighted the support people required to remain at a healthy weight. The nursing home team had provided all staff with recent oral care training and the mouth care matters team had been contacted to deliver training to new starters. The manager had arranged this having recognised the benefits of good oral hygiene and how this positively impacted on care.

The provider worked with other health professionals and social care partners to try and maintain continuity of care for people and maximise good outcomes for them. 

The provider linked in and worked collaboratively with various external health professionals for effective care and support. There was partnership working for the benefit of people living at the care home. A staff member told us, “ Yes; [there is] good support, they are on the ball with everything. Podiatry and TVN are very good.” Staff told us communication had improved; information was shared in the best interests of people living at the home. Unit managers, nurses and staff worked well together and were able to share or delegate tasks to ensure people received prompt care and support.

Staff worked well in trying to meet people’s needs, sometimes in difficult circumstances, due to people’s deteriorating health and conditions such as dementia. One partner we contacted for feedback considered they now had a strong working relationship with staff at the home and added, “We have seen the significant improvements made under the new management and the introduction of Unit Managers.”

Electronic care plans reflected input and advice from other health professionals. There was evidence of referrals to other professionals, such as the GP, SaLT, TVN and falls clinic when warranted. Information was shared with other health professionals at appointments or on hospital admission; any outcomes from appointments were recorded in care plans and communicated to staff via handovers and meetings.

People had access to GPs, community nurses, optician and dentists for routine appointments. They also attended appointments with other medical professionals, such as hospital consultants, to help treat any identified health conditions.

People were supported to live healthier lives, assisted by staff who encouraged this. Staff told us they reported any concerns with people’s health and wellbeing to the nurse, or to the management team. Electronic systems were then updated to reflect this. The senior staff team included people with clinical expertise that other staff could draw upon when needed. Electronic care plans included past medical history, details of current medication and other details about the person relevant for health and medical professionals.

People were supported to have healthier lives. Care plans, risk assessments and health action plans outlined people’s health needs and any specific support that might be required from staff, for example modified food and fluids, time specific medication or the use of specialist equipment. People received regular reviews from health and social care professionals. Everyone living at the home was registered with a GP and a weekly ward round took place. Unit managers had the opportunity to raise any concerns with the GP in a timely manner and people were able to receive a prompt diagnosis and treatment.

People told us they were able to see a GP when they needed to, and staff were responsive when they were unwell. Relatives also confirmed this.

Staff told us and we saw they routinely monitored people’s well-being and sought medical interventions when required. Staff told us people’s changing needs were discussed in handovers, were documented on care systems and management sourced training on how best staff could support people.

The provider valued feedback from people, relatives, professionals and staff, and used this to help identify and shape improvements to the service. There was a complaints policy and process available for people and other stakeholders to follow. Any concerns could also be raised more informally if people preferred, for example in resident meetings.

People told us staff were respectful and gained consent before they provided any care and support. Most people had family involved in their care. Advocacy services were available and could be contacted for anyone who did not have a representative.

Staff understood the importance of gaining consent and we heard consent being sought by staff throughout the assessment. Staff asked people’s consent prior to giving personal care, moving and handling, offering medication and if offering assistance at mealtimes. For people who did not have the capacity to consent, staff delivered care and support in people's best interests and in line with the persons care plan.

Where people did not understand the care and treatment they required, a capacity assessment was completed, and a referral made to the relevant authority to deprive the person of their liberty. Where relatives held lasting power of attorney, this was reflected in people's care records; relatives had been involved with the care planning so that people’s best interests were considered by all relevant parties.