Alison 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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.
Care plans provided personalised information about people’s health and support needs. Young people were fully involved in the creation and review of their care plans.
Young people’s care plans were reviewed with them regularly to reflect any change in need. Any required areas had been updated in consultation with the young person. Staff told us the provider had systems to update them when young people’s assessed needs changed. One staff member said, “[We have] a read and sign file, and we look in it every time we come on shift. Changes are highlighted. We have allocated time to look at it during the shift.”

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.
Young people’s needs were met in line with current best practice guidance. Management had quickly identified people’s change in needs, made appropriate referrals for specialist support and ensured this was documented. One professional said, “Staff have openly acknowledged limitations in their knowledge and experience…and have sought advice and consultation with [our team] appropriately and pursued emergency medical attention when indicated.”
Weekly multi-disciplinary team reviews and specialist involvement were clearly documented in young people’s health care plans.
One professional told us they felt the service could benefit from increased psychologist involvement and oversight. We shared this feedback with the provider who, through their own governance systems, had already recognised this and taken action to address. On the week of our assessment the provider had interviewed and employed a Consultant Clinical Psychologist to further strengthen the psychological input into the home, opportunity for bespoke staff training and reflective practice.

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.
Care records demonstrated the provider worked closely with other professionals to ensure people’s needs were met. Weekly professionals’ meetings were recorded and showed collaboration between teams and partners. Information was shared with other professionals when needed to ensure people received joined up care. Risk assessments and care plans were updated regularly with input from multi-disciplinary team meetings. One professional said, “Communication is effective and timely. I am kept well-informed through the weekly handover emails, which provide a clear overview of any developments, incidents, or changes in the young people’s presentation. When I arrive at the service, I also receive a thorough verbal handover from the senior or management team, which helps ensure I have the most up-to-date information before beginning any therapy work with the young people.”

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.
Staff supported people to live healthy lives, by assessing and planning for people’s healthcare needs. One professional said, “The service is run very professionally while providing appropriate and friendly support for the young people at the home. The Care home are very proactive is all areas and strive to give all young people in their care the best chance to succeed.”
Young people’s health was monitored holistically by the staff and management team. Health care professionals confirmed staff knew how to respond to changes in young people’s health and followed their guidance effectively. The registered manager worked closely with the GP surgery who visited the home each week. They discussed people’s needs and supported the staff to make referrals to other professionals.

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 provider used recognised tools to monitor people's health and wellbeing, with prompt action taken when a change in needs was identified. Any change in young people’s wellbeing was reported to the senior person on duty and then escalated to the appropriate professionals when needed.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.
At the last assessment in June 2023 we identified the provider had not sufficiently assessed young people's capacity to consent or demonstrated effective oversight in this area. At this assessment we followed up on the previous concerns and found improvements had been made.
Consent to care and support was routinely obtained when delivering care to young people and clearly recorded in their care notes. Where people lacked capacity to make specific decisions, staff followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. This ensured that care was delivered lawfully and in line with young people’s wishes.
The staff had received training on consent and mental capacity so they could apply this knowledge in practice.
We questioned the decision-making process for one person who did not have a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) in place. DoLS are a legal procedure to protect people who lack capacity and are deprived of their liberty in care homes or hospitals. The provider shared documentation of ongoing discussions with the local authority to evidence their consideration of capacity and consent when delivering person-centred care and treatment. The provider advised they would continue to review this on an ongoing basis to ensure that care is delivered lawfully and in line with young persons wishes.