Moorgate Lodge

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 assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

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.

The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. People’s needs were assessed and care provided in line with people’s preferences. Care plans were reviewed monthly or sooner if required, to ensure support provided accurately met people’s current needs.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. Evidence based clinical tools were used to assess and monitor people’s needs and associated risks. For example, a nationally recognised skin integrity tool was used to ensure pressure damage was identified at an early stage and staff knew common sites prone to pressure damage and could intervene at the onset. This minimised discomfort. People were supported to access nutrition and hydration. We saw nutritious snacks and drinks were provided between meals. Some people gave negative comments about the provision of food. However, observations of the lunchtime meal were positive, people appeared to enjoy their meals. Staff assisted people where needed in a caring, discreate and supportive way, ensuring they were enjoying their meals.

The provider 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. Staff and leaders worked closely with external professionals to ensure care and support was consistent. Information was passed on to staff during handovers to ensure staff were up to date with current information and events. Staff worked well as a team and looked for opportunities to minimise discomfort.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. People had access to healthcare professionals as required and staff referred people appropriately. Staff followed guidance provided by external professionals to ensure people received appropriate care. Guidance was available for staff in managing weight loss in the absence of dietician involvement. Monitoring of people’s weight, skin integrity and other clinical areas, was completed through the use of recognised tools such as the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool and Waterlow pressure area risk assessment. Care documentation was kept up to date to show any trends and patterns and to review actions where needed. An external professional said, “Staff are found to identify patient risk and put in place safety measures or liaise with any other professional who would be able to assist/help. The service promoted a varied diet, fortified and liaised with dieticians. Staff also reported to [other services] for advice and provide sensor mats/sensors to reduce/assist managing falls. They ensured the GP was aware of any changes and managed treatment/advice as prescribed.”

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. People’s health and well-being was routinely monitored, and any emerging healthcare needs were addressed as soon as possible. We saw actions had been taken to improve outcomes for people. For example, where people had moved into the home with pressure damage, staff and external professionals worked together to improve this and to ensure comfort and pain was managed appropriately.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. We saw staff involved people in their care and offered choices to people and respected their decisions. Staff explained what they were doing and checked out how they felt about the task prior to proceeding. Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) had been applied for as necessary. There was a process in place to track and monitor applications and when authorisations needed to be renewed. Mental capacity care plans were in place and where people lacked capacity to consent, best interest decisions had been made and were regularly reviewed.