The Gables 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

For this key question we assessed 3 quality statements relating to; Assessing needs, Delivering evidence-based care and treatment and How staff teams work together. Assessments and care plans varied in quality. Some people’s assessments and care plans were comprehensive and included all the essential information to ensure staff were able to meet their needs. However, not all care records were completed to the same standard. This meant there was a risk people may not receive effective care. Care plans and information from other professionals had not been available to staff during both days of our assessment. This had led to 1 person receiving inconsistent support which could have exposed them to the risk of harm. The staff team worked well together. Handover meetings between staff were held at each shift and each person living in the home was considered. Information was shared about any incidents and outstanding needs.

This service scored 54 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Not all care plans and risk management plans were thorough and up to date. Care records were not always completed with enough detail to allow them to be reviewed. We found food and drink taken by a person assessed at risk nutritionally were insufficient. Access to information from other professionals was not always available to staff in the care records. Care records for people with diabetes did not include guidance for staff to recognise when this may present a risk to people. We did not find evidence of harm, however, people with more complex needs may be exposed to a risk of harm.

We spoke to 1 person who told us, they believed their needs had been appropriately assessed and they received effective support from staff which had improved their health. Relatives praised the care provided by staff and were complimentary about them.

Staff did not have a consistent understanding of people's needs. This was because the information in assessments varied. Some assessments lacked sufficient detail.

The provider had not always followed their own assessment and care planning procedures. Care records varied in quality and detail which meant some people could be at risk of not having their needs understood or met by staff. Where the provider had followed robust procedures for the assessment and care planning of people’s needs we found people had achieved good outcomes.

Staff felt they worked well together as a team. However, though staff felt confident they had enough information about people's needs in order to provide effective care, we found some inconsistencies in their understanding. We have addressed this above.

Feedback from relatives was mixed about being involved in decisions about their relations care. Some people were happy but 1 person felt they had not always been kept up to date. We spoke with people living in the home and 1 said they had been involved in decisions about their care.

The quality of care records varied. Though some people had high quality and up to date information, which included information which could be taken to hospital with them at short notice, some people did not. This meant there was a risk their needs may not be identified to other services. Staff had thorough handovers at each shift change which helped ensure they were aware of people's immediate needs.

A relative told us how effectively the provider had liaised with health services to ensure their relation received good quality care.

District nursing services were positive about the availability of staff to discuss patients needs and staff being able to refer people appropriately.

Staff felt they worked well together as a team. Some staff had been in post for some time and felt positive about the systems in the home.

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.