Barnet Mencap

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.

Before agreeing to support people, the registered manager assessed each person’s needs, so the provider understood what support people required and provided the staff with the right skills. Staff reviewed people’s needs regularly and updated care plans when anything changed, which meant the information they worked from stayed accurate.

Support plans included detailed communication profiles, and the registered manager reviewed these regularly. This meant staff always had up‑to‑date guidance on how each person communicated, which helped them choose the right approaches, understand people’s preferences, and responded appropriately to their needs.

A care worker told us, “All relevant documentation is clear and up to date.”

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.

Staff used structured assessment tools and clear support plans that reflected people’s needs and goals. Staff followed specialist advice from speech and language therapy [SALT], nutrition, dementia and reablement teams, and built this guidance into everyday care. Staff received a wide range of training, including dementia, autism, learning disability and safeguarding. They were also trained to provide support that considers people’s past experiences. This meant staff were able to use current best practice. Staff also used a system to track changes in real time, review goals, and update plans, which helped them make informed decisions based on up to‑ ‑date information. The provider presented information in accessible formats and used easy read and visual tools, which supported care based on current good 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.

Staff made referrals to specialist teams to ensure people received the right input at the earliest opportunity. The provider recorded multidisciplinary involvement throughout people’s records, demonstrating coordinated working across agencies. Staff incorporated specialist recommendations into support plans, so guidance was followed in day-to-day care. This meant people received timely, coordinated support based on specialist advice, helping ensure their care remained effective and responsive to their needs.

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 said they support people to attend annual health checks and promote diet, weight management, exercise, and encourage GP involvement.

Staff respected people’s choices and said they would, “Flag any concerns directly to management,perhaps anyfamily, should that be the correct involvement agreed on in their notes.”

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive and consistent, and they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care through scheduled reviews, day to‑day checks and used an online system staff used to record updates and changes. Staff regularly reported changes in health or wellbeing, and updated care plans so they remained accurate. Managers used audits, incident reviews and feedback from people to make improvements, and staff described how learning was shared when things went wrong. People achieved positive outcomes such as progress with personal goals, and staff said documentation was always clear and up to date.

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

Staff obtained and recorded consent through signed consent forms covering care and treatment, medicines, benefits and other categories, each with a set review date.

Support plans set out how staff explained choices, offered options and respected people’s decisions. They also showed staff maintained people’s autonomy, reassured people where needed, and ensured the person’s voice remained central to all decisions about their support. They did this by providing step‑by‑step guidance on the communication approaches, prompts and decision‑making supports each person preferred, so staff knew exactly how to involve people meaningfully in their choices.

Care plans written in the first person showed people made decisions about their daily routines, preferences and outcomes. Viewed documentation showed a person centred‑ approach aligned with respecting consent and individual rights.