Symonds House

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 needs were assessed prior to their admission to the service. Care plans were developed in partnership with people and their loved ones, and reflected their personal preferences, choices and how they wished to receive care and support. The registered manager and deputy manager were responsible for the review and the auditing of the care plans.

Records showed people’s views and opinions were respected, listened to and implemented as part of the day-to-day support in most cases. Although for one person’s records, we noted that their capacity had changed since they were admitted, and their care records had not been updated. We spoke with the registered manager, and they confirmed with us following our visit that these had now been updated and reflected the persons wishes and choices.

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.

People’s care preferences and wishes were taken into consideration when planning their care. Staff worked with other health professionals in a timely manner to support people’s care needs.

Where required people had food and fluid charts in place and the recommendations were in place from the speech and language therapist assessment.

People had mixed views about the food. Although they told us they were given choices but could always ask for something else if they did not enjoy or want the choices on offer. People and their families’ comments included, “I like the food.” “Staff serve a lot of mashed potatoes, but I have asked for more boiled potatoes which they do give me” and “The food is okay. It would be nice to have some more fresh vegetables and fruit.”

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 had established positive working relationships with partner agencies, cooperating efficiently to achieve the best possible outcomes for people. Referrals and requests for professional advice were made promptly whenever concerns arose. Documented evidence confirmed staff followed the guidance provided by healthcare professionals.

Regular meetings/handovers took place, and this had improved since our first visit, to include the weekends to ensure that all information is shared amongst staff.

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 local healthcare services and interventions were documented in people’s care records. A person’s relative told us, “A Doctor comes round every week, and you can arrange to see them. They keep an eye on their health and will get help if they need it” and “Staff got the dietician in to help with their eating and drinking and this has improved a lot.”

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.

Staff knew people well. Most relatives told us they were kept well informed of any changes their family member may be experiencing, we were told by a relative, “All the staff will talk to you and tell you what has happened. If there is anything that I need to know about immediately they will call me.” If I ask about [family member], staff will always tell me, and they seem to know what is going on. They don’t make a secret of it.”

There was evidence of regular reviews and action being taken immediately following any changes to people’s health needs. The service worked closely with healthcare professionals who knew people well and followed their advice to help meet people’s changing needs.

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

The provider had systems and processes that ensured the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) was followed effectively, to support people who lacked capacity to make specific decisions about their care. Mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions were completed following the principles of the MCA, to ensure decisions made on behalf of people were made lawfully.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the MCA. In care homes, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People that were assessed as requiring a DoLS had these in place.

Staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and understood its principles. Staff respected people’s choices and were receptive when people shared their views and wishes.