Three Cups

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 newly registered service. This key question has been rated Good.

This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed.

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 told us about their experiences of how the provider carried out assessments. One person said, “The manager visited me before I moved in and they asked me questions on what I needed help with.”

The registered manager completed comprehensive assessments with people and, where appropriate, their relatives. These reflected people’s needs, views and preferences, and people were given copies to support transparency and involvement in their care.

Care plans included information about people’s histories, what was important to them, their faith and cultural preferences. Staff accessed up-to-date care plans electronically, and changes in people’s health or care needs were shared verbally or in writing. This helped staff provide safe, personalised care in line with people’s needs and choices.

One staff member told us, “For the recent person who moved in, I was involved in the assessment. The manager met with the staff team before the person moved in to discuss their needs and risks.”

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.

Relatives told us they were involved in care decisions. One relative told us, “Staff keep us involved and ask for our views about my family member’s care. We are kept updated about any changes and feel included in decisions.”

Staff completed ongoing training, including learning disability training and support for people managing anxiety. Training records showed all training was current and up to date.

Support plans were person-centred, reflected people’s preferences and were reviewed regularly. Staff supported people to take part in meaningful activities in line with their needs and wishes.

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.

People told us staff worked well together and communicated effectively. One person told us, “The good thing here is that staff talk to each other. If I tell one staff member about something I would like done, they hand it over to the next staff member.”

Relatives told us staff worked well as a team and communicated effectively with families and professionals. Care review meetings supported open discussion and ensured people’s views were considered. One relative said, “Staff are professional and they know their job well.” Another said, “They work well as a team.”

During our visit, we observed effective teamwork and communication. Staff discussed tasks, consulted people about their daily preferences, and completed daily and handover notes to support consistent care.

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.

The registered manager told us the service focused on supporting people to live healthier lives. Staff encouraged people to make informed lifestyle choices and supported them to attend health appointments, including GP, dental and optician appointments.

Staff worked with health professionals, followed medical advice, monitored people’s wellbeing, updated records and escalated concerns when needed. One staff member said supporting people with diet, exercise, appointments and hygiene was an important part of their role. Nutrition care plans gave staff clear guidance on supporting people’s dietary needs.

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 spoke positively about staff supporting them to work towards their goals. Care outcomes were reviewed regularly, and systems were in place to monitor people’s health and wellbeing and identify concerns. Staff knew when to seek advice from external professionals.

One person told us “Staff are helping me to look for a new home, as this is a temporary move for me.”

People’s needs and outcomes were discussed during team meetings, supervision and reviews to improve their experiences. Care records reflected people’s preferences, routines and support needs, with information gathered from people and, where appropriate, their relatives.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

People told us staff asked for consent before providing support. Staff had completed Mental Capacity Act 2005 training and understood the principles of consent. They explained care tasks and sought people’s agreement before providing support. One person told us, “Staff always ask for my agreement before they support me with anything.”

The service worked within the principles of the MCA. People were supported to make decisions where possible, and MCA assessments, best interest decisions and care plans recorded people’s capacity and consent for specific care tasks. Decisions made on people’s behalf were considered in their best interests and were least restrictive. Legal authorisations to deprive people of their liberty were managed appropriately, with conditions met and reviewed. Staff completed MCA training to support their understanding of capacity, consent and advocacy.

We found the back door had an automatic locking system and appropriate assessments had been completed. We discussed whether a less restrictive approach could support independent garden access. The registered manager said they would review this and consider an alert system.