Castleford House Nursing Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

People were treated as individuals and their views sought and listened to. People were asked for their views on how the service was managed and they knew how to raise a complaint if needed. People, relatives and staff said they felt encouraged by the new manager of the service. Relatives concerns had been addressed. The staff team fostered a supportive environment and provided personalised care to meet people’s needs. People felt listened to and were happy with the care and support they received. We saw people had access to healthcare professionals when needed to ensure the best possible outcomes for their health.

This service scored 87 (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 Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

People received care and support that was personalised, coordinated and worked well for them. People could see their GP or other health professionals when needed. People told us they felt confident and able to raise any concerns they might have. They said they felt listened to and were assured in the management of the service. People were happy they could spend time with friends and go out in the community.

The service worked with other health and social care professionals in line with people’s specific needs. Staff were seen supporting people who live with dementia in a person-centred way, using appropriate body language and engagement. For example, staff approached people face on which supported communication for people with visual impairments who may struggle with decreased peripheral vision. Peripheral vision is how people see things which are outside of their direct line of sight. The manager told us about a person who was being nursed in bed who was at risk of not receiving an equitable experience due to them not being able to be in the communal areas. The manager explained how they had supported good communication with the family to get to know the person’s likes and dislikes, and co-ordinated with the kitchen staff to ensure their meal-times were more personal. This led to the person gaining weight and enjoying their food more. The manager also, through discussion with the family, understood the person had lived a quiet lifestyle. The manager facilitated moving the person to a quieter room with their consent and involvement of the family. This had also contributed to the person feeling more comfortable with eating and drinking.

Where people were unable to make decisions for themselves, Mental Capacity Assessments (MCA) had been completed. We found however these were not person or decision specific. This meant people who lacked mental capacity to make certain decisions were at risk of their wishes not always being considered. We brought this to the manager and clinical lead’s attention, and they took steps to ensure people’s MCA’s were re-assessed and improved. Where necessary, decisions were made on behalf of people, in consultation with appropriate others and in people's best interests. Staff had received training about the MCA and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.