Barton Place Nursing 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

Peoples’ care, support and treatment reflected their needs and any protected equality characteristics. Staff knew how to respond to peoples’ specific health needs such as recognising a change in health status. Changes were discussed daily in handover and the daily head of department meetings. People were supported to have access to appropriate health professionals. For example, medical tests were followed up, medicines optimisation was reviewed with the pharmacy and GPs and pain relief was considered.

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 were well cared for. Those unable to tell us looked clean and comfortable. Where people showed they did not want personal care at a given time, staff returned or managed the situation so people did not become distressed. Peoples’ complex physical communication behaviours were monitored and staff showed they understood people well.

The clinical lead told us they visited all potential admissions and used a clear assessment tool to ensure the service could meet peoples’ needs. They also spoke with families to get as much information as possible.

People were assessed comprehensively prior to moving to the service to ensure staff could meet their needs. Though was given to the needs of the people already living at Barton Place so ensure placements were appropriate. Care plans were detailed and able to be updated quickly. Monitoring tools were used well, for example to ensure adequate wellbeing, pressure relief, food and nutrition with alerts guiding staff on electronic care recording system.

People who could said they were happy with their care. Most people were unable to understand their care needs due to living with complex dementia. Relatives told us they were not always involved in the care planning and records did not always show input. We fed this back to the registered manager. However, care plans were detailed and had personalised information to help staff support people in a person-centred way.

The registered manager was arranging reviews with families and devising a newsletter to ensure families understood and were kept up to date with peoples’ needs. Some feedback showed some families would like more communication and the registered manager was responsive to improving this.

Staff received training in specific relevant health conditions such as Parkinsons disease. They were trained in best practice and had up to date guidance and policies. Kitchen staff were knowledgeable about peoples’ dietary needs, including additional training in attractive puree meals. Monitoring of food and nutrition ensured people were offered a god diet and foods they enjoyed. People received a varied diet and were able to choose what they enjoyed or were more likely to eat.

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.

Staff knew people well and discussed any changes daily so that peoples’ specific health and social needs could be met. We saw staff reporting issues to the clinical lead and team leaders throughout the visit.

Staff were able to speak confidently about the care they delivered and understood how they contributed to people’s health and wellbeing.

People were supported to gain access to appropriate health professionals. One health professional told us, “I find staff caring, knowledgeable and intuitive as to the needs/care of complex residents, [the clinical lead] provides excellent leadership of the care team and is able to liaise appropriately with professionals to support care. Residents are referred to our service in a timely manner and our advice is accurately followed.”

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.

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