Hoylake Cottage

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 71 (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 care needs were fully assessed before moving into Hoylake Cottage which included an assessment of their communication needs. This helped to ensure a smooth transition to help them settle in quickly and have their needs known and met. A family member told us, “[Name] cannot talk, but the staff understand them perfectly by deeply recognising their behaviour, expressions and cues. Because staff know them so well, the lack of speech is never a barrier to them receiving exactly what they want.”

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. Risk assessments and care plans reflected professional guidance received about people’s care needs and we observed staff following this guidance when assisting people. For example, staff were knowledgeable about medical conditions and people’s eating and drinking needs and associated risks. This included when people needed a modified diet or required a thickening agent to be added to drinks, because of a known choking risk.

People generally spoke positively about the food available. One person told us, “The food is out of this world. It’s very good.”

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. Referrals were made to other health and social care professionals when needed. Referrals were appropriate and made in a timely manner based on people’s needs.

Staff worked in collaboration with family members. For example, one family member described how they worked with staff around important routines which had reduced the frequency one person was receiving additional medicine when distressed or anxious. Family members told us they felt well informed about people’s care. One commented, “The staff keep us up to date with any changes.”

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. For example, one person told us they had been supported to access products to combat nicotine addiction. Staff also supported people to access doctor appointments and other health services when needed.

The provider did not always routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They did not always ensure that outcomes were positive and consistent, or that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. For example, we found some gaps in the care records completed to demonstrate routine care delivery, including repositioning and oral health, had taken place as planned for a small number of people. We were satisfied people had not experienced poor or unsafe care however we shared our findings with the registered manager. The registered manager assured us action would be taken to raise this with staff and would put measures in place to monitor records more closely.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Decisions were made in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Detailed records were maintained. When a person could consent to care, this was appropriately recorded and reflected through care plans. During our assessment, we observed staff asking and explaining to people prior to any care intervention.