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.

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.

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 people’s specific communication needs, for example one person was non-verbal; their care plan included nationally recognised tools like PECS and Makaton to be considered to aid communication and support the person to communicate with staff regarding their care and wellbeing needs. Staff we spoke to confirmed information was available to them regarding people’s individual communication needs and they would be provided additional training if needed.

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. In addition, people received care which promoted their quality of life and supported nationally recognised guidance of Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture (RSRCRC). This meant people received care following best practice guidance and were involved in making decisions around what mattered to them in a communication method which met their individual needs.

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 was non-verbal and required support from familiar staff and a documented story, to be shared when moving between services. This was included in their care plan and a summary document available to go with the person if required. 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 contained information about plans to support their health and wellbeing. For example, accessing physical activities in the community like football or basketball to maintain individuals’ health. In addition, people were given information about healthy meal options, and they were supported with their food shopping. People were given the information and then supported to 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 people's 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 their relative with a diagnosis of epilepsy. This included documenting and managing any seizures and communicating with relatives appropriately.

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 ability to give consent. Where people did not have capacity to give consent, appropriate decision specific mental capacity assessments were in place with best interest 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. In addition, there was a system in place for referral to an independent advocate to support the person where appropriate.