Qualitcare24-7 Ltd Portsmouth

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 assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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 individual needs were assessed and regularly reviewed in line with systems and processes in place which were managed by management, team leaders and involved the people they supported. This included an assessment prior to care commencing, a review after 4 weeks to ensure person centred information was included and were reviewed regularly or in response to a change of support needs. For example, 1 person’s care needs had changed, and additional support was required, management made appropriate referrals and worked with external professionals to increase allocated support visits received.

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.

For example, people’s skin integrity was assessed and managed using best practice guidance including Braden scale which was a nationally recognised skin integrity management tool. In addition, Malnutrition Universal Screening tool was used to assess people’s weight appropriately which staff we spoke to confirmed they knew about. This meant people were supported in line with nationally recognised guidance, by staff who knew how to apply this to individuals they provided care for, which people confirmed.

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 were involved in creating a document which summarised and reflected their individual needs so this could be shared when moving between services. This was supported by a management team who knew the people they supported well, and how to communicate with them to encourage them to be involved in the process when sharing their story. For example, 1 person had a summary care record in place in their home which detailed their mobility needs and what support would be required in the event of moving between services. This meant people did not have to repeat their story, but external staff would know how best to provide care to them.

Systems and processes were in place to promote working with other professionals and sharing information appropriately and staff were knowledgeable about people’s individual needs which was confirmed by people they supported.

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’s care plans included information about their health and wellbeing. This included information about physiotherapy exercises for staff to refer to and support, healthy meal options and how to support people’s independence. For example, one person who lived with limited mobility, was supported by staff to access the garden when appropriate which they told us improved their wellbeing. Also, people told us they were supported to maintain their independence and care plans we reviewed reflected this; staff were also able to describe how they supported people to be independent and make their own choices.

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.

The management structure included team leaders who performed regular reviews of peoples care plans and shared any changes in needs with care staff appropriately. People were involved in their care plan reviews which were performed annually, or when there had been a change of needs. Staff confirmed they were aware of how to escalate any changes appropriately and were able to give examples of when they had done so. These included acute health concerns and changes to long term needs. For example, 1 person we spoke to told us how staff supported them to monitor their diabetes and escalate to other professionals when required. They told us, “Staff know how to help, and the care plans reflect that.”In addition, when people had external appointments, outcomes and follow up plans were recorded in their care plans for staff to be aware of.

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

People received care from trained staff who understood how and when to gain people’s consent. Staff received training in consent and understood what to do when someone lacked the capacity to give consent. Where people did not have capacity to give consent, appropriate decision specific mental capacity assessments were in place with best interests’ meetings and decisions recorded.

People we spoke to confirmed staff gained their consent prior to providing personal care. Processes were in place to gain people’s feedback around the care they received, and they had the opportunity to raise any concerns. People’s consent was obtained and recorded in their care plans which staff confirmed they had access to.