Northway House

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. This is the first inspection since the service was registered to the provider Pebblestones Limited. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.

This service scored 58 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service did not always make sure people’s care and treatment were effective because they did not always check and discuss people’s health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. People had their needs assessed before they moved to the home. These assessments were shared with staff to give information about each person. People’s care plans were devised from assessments. However, we found 4 people had very basic care plans which did not give staff the required information to provide personalised care to these people. There was a stable staff team who knew people well and supported people effectively. This was raised with the manager and assurances were given that more detail would be added to care plans without delay

The service did not always plan and deliver people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. People’s care generally reflected their needs. However, individual care plans were not always comprehensive and did not always reflect the care provided. For example, 1 person was physically supported by staff to eat their lunch and were served a softened meal. The care plan for this person stated they ate independently and were able to eat a meal of ordinary consistency. This was raised with the manager and amended during the site visit to ensure the plan fully reflected the person’s up to date needs

The service worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services. The district nursing team visited the home regularly to provide nursing treatments to individuals. People were supported to attend medical appointments for preventive and ongoing monitoring. On the day of the site visit 1 person was supported to attend an appointment with a member of staff of their choosing.

The service did not always support people to manage their health and wellbeing, so people could not always maximise their independence, choice and control. The service did not always support people to live healthier lives, or where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. There was no recorded evidence people were always involved in managing their own health and wellbeing. Some care plans were very basic and did not give information about healthcare needs or how people wished these to be met. However, another care plan seen gave clear information and instructions about the person’s specific healthcare needs.

The service did not always routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They did not always ensure that outcomes were positive and consistent, or that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. Care plans did not give evidence of how people had been involved in planning and reviewing their care or healthcare needs. Not all care plans had been effectively reviewed to make sure they provided good outcomes for people. However, people we spoke with felt they received care which met their needs. One visiting relative said, “I can’t praise them enough. I would certainly give them a good rating.”

The service told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People only received care with their consent, or in their best interests. Where people lacked capacity to make certain decisions there was good recording of how best interests decisions had been made.