Holmwood Care Centre

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.

At our last inspection we rated this key question good. At this assessment we assessed a total of 6 quality statements from this key question and the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 62 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Records of people’s assessed needs was not always accurate and up to date. The current electronic care plan system had been in place for 18 months. Staff told us they had to use some work arounds to make the system work for them. For example, staff could not enter the correct prescribed dressing into the system, so would select something else. This meant the records were inaccurate, which posed a potential risk that incorrect care could be given to someone.

However, permanent staff gave consistent information around people’s care needs. The new incoming provider told us the new electronic care system, would support nurses and the management team in accurate record keeping along with identifying changes in people’s assessed needs in a timely way.

People and where appropriate, their family, were involved in the planning of people’s care. Relatives confirmed they engaged in this process and felt listened to by the staff.

The provider could not always be assured people received care in line with evidence based practice. For example, where a person had a specific health diagnosis, there were no plans of care and details on how to reduce risk of harm to the person and others. The provider could not demonstrate that best practice has been applied to demonstrate this was managed effectively.

Staff told us the training and support needed to be enhanced to develop the skills they needed to deliver people’s care and treatment to them, for example, where people may need additional mental health support.

Records held details of important information about health and social care professionals who would be involved in people's care.

People’s records held details of important information for health and social care professionals contact details who would be involved in people's care. People told us they had support from staff to access external healthcare services and had access to services such as dental services, opticians and hospital appointments.

Systems were in place to ensure details and correspondence from health and social care professionals who were involved in people's care remained up to date and relevant.

All people we spoke with felt staff knew them well enough to recognise when they were not themselves.

Staff shared examples of how they supported people to live healthier lives. For example, putting prompt measures in place for a person who was found to be losing weight.

The provider had systems in place to ensure people had access to health and social care services as and when they needed them.

People experienced good outcomes because of the support provided to them.

All staff we spoke with said they thought standards of care were good, which led to positive outcomes for people.

The management team monitored people's care and support as well as any specific health care needs, such as diabetes or weight loss. Care plans were reviewed and updated whenever there were any changes in a person’s care needs.

We received a mixed response from people in relation to staff seeking consent prior to providing care and support. Some people told us that some staff did not always seek consent before providing support. One person shared an example where they were repositioned at night time and said, “[Staff] don’t speak, don’t ask permission or told to roll over, just push me.” We also saw an occasion where an agency staff member had not spoken to a person and treated them in an undignified manner. We raised this with the manager so action could be taken to address this. However, people told us and we saw other examples where staff were respectful to people and sought consent before providing care.

Staff understood people’s individual capacity to make decisions about their care and support.

Records showed multi-disciplinary teams had been contacted and involved in this aspect of people's care. The provider had systems in place for assessing and recording people’s capacity. The provider was working in line with the principles of the MCA.