Stamford 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

People had regular reviews of their care. People and relatives were able to discuss how things were going for them and talk about what they wanted their care and support to look like. Staff worked together with people’s care teams, so people were able to maintain their health and well-being. Staff understood how the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) impacted in the care they provided to people. 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.

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.

We did not look at Assessing needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

There was a diverse menu in place and people were given choices. Drinks were readily available for people to remain hydrated. We observed staff were kind and patient when assisting people with feeding. Staff also asked residents if they wanted additional servings. However, some people expressed their dissatisfaction about their meals being served late and a lack of variety in relation to their suppers.

Staff knew people’s individual needs and how to support them accordingly. Staff told us people could have a shower or bath if they wanted one. Staff offered people choices and respected their choices. Staff were aware of people’s dietary requirements and supported them during mealtimes as per their care plans. A staff member said, “People are offered a choice regarding food, if they don't like what is on the menu, they are offered alternatives.”

Systems and processes promoted a person-centred culture. The service worked to meet people’s needs as much as possible. People’s preferences were recorded in their care plans. We noted this was also discussed in meetings and staff were reminded of. The service carried out a monthly mealtime experience audit. One of these audits had identified a person who complained about not having a cooked meal at teatime. As a result, the service held discussions with the person and their relative to consider their preferences. People were offered high quality and a variety of diets for their specific needs, for example, chopped, pureed, diabetic, low fat and low salt. Food molds were used to improve the presentation of pureed food.

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.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

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.