Fortune Smiles Service Ltd

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

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.

People received consistent and effective care and support due to the provider implementing a comprehensive pre-admission assessment before people started to use the service. This approach ensured that the service could met people’s needs and to ensure that staff had the correct information in place, so they were clear how to deliver safe and personal care to people.

One person told us, “The manager visited me and completed an assessment and shared the information with me to ensure that everything was correct. I was then sent a care plan on how staff will be helping me.”

The registered manager explained that they take a proactive stance when assessing new referrals. This approach helps ensure they can meet every aspect of a person’s needs, including their overall well-being, as well as emotional, social, and cultural requirements. By thoroughly understanding these factors, the manager is able to offer staff precise, tailored instructions to deliver personalised care. This approach guarantees that each care plan is both appropriate and adaptable, allowing for adjustments as people’s circumstances or needs evolve.

Staff stated that the registered manager held meetings with them prior to commencing work with people, to make certain that staff fully understood each person's preferences and support requirements. One staff said, “The manager met with me before I started working with a [person] in their home. They also tested my understanding and knowledge of the information that was in the care plan and risk assessment.”

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 wishes and preferences were documented throughout their care plans. The records captured medical and support needs and detailed how individuals preferred to be cared for. For example, information about preferred waking times, favourite meals, hobbies, and social activities was included, allowing staff to tailor support in a way that was meaningful to each person.

One individual shared that, thanks to the assistance provided by Fortune Smiles Service Ltd, they have been able to continue living independently in their own home. “Because I have carers each day visit me this has meant that I did not need to move”.

The provider demonstrated a proactive approach in ensuring that the service remained fully compliant with the most recent legislation and adhered to established best practice guidelines. To achieve this, the provider closely monitored changes in relevant laws and sector-specific standards, promptly integrating any necessary updates into the service's policies and procedures. These updates were communicated to all staff members through regular briefings, newsletters, and training sessions, ensuring that everyone was kept informed and aware of their responsibilities to ensure care and treatments were delivered effectively

In addition to sharing information, the provider implemented robust systems to verify that staff had a clear understanding of the updates and were able to apply them effectively in their daily work. This included conducting periodic knowledge checks, supervision sessions, and spot checks, as well as encouraging open dialogue where staff could raise queries or seek clarification. By embedding these practices, the provider adopted a culture of continuous improvement and accountability, supporting both staff confidence and high-quality service delivery.

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.

The provider demonstrated a strong commitment to person-centred care by actively involving people using the service, their families, and relevant professionals in care review meetings. With the people’s consent, these reviews served as a platform for open dialogue, where everyone’s perspective was valued and considered. This inclusive approach ensured that care planning was tailored to the unique needs, preferences, and aspirations of each person.

People and their relatives expressed positive feedback regarding the service, particularly appreciating how they were kept fully informed and actively involved in all aspects of their care package. They valued being given the opportunity to contribute meaningfully during the review process. One person said, “I have no issues of not being updated or involved around changes being made as the staff always involves me with every area of my care.”

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 were supported to see healthcare professionals when required. The registered manager explained that the service actively supported people to attend their healthcare appointments if their relatives was unable to make an appointment with their loved ones.

Staff told us how they worked with closely with other professionals. One staff said, “If I identified that a [person] was unwell, I would contact their GP,111 or 999 to ensure they received the right medical help.”

The provider maintained a system for documenting their interactions with health and social care professionals, ensuring that key details regarding individuals’ health were recorded correctly and communicated to the appropriate members of staff.

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 played an important role in ensuring that people receiving care and support were fully informed about the range of care and support available to them. This approach ensured that everyone involved understood the implications of each option and could make decisions that best suited their needs and preferences.

Feedback from people who used the service indicated that staff were consistently supportive and attentive, one person told us, “I have nothing negative to say about my care staff, they do a good job, and their communication is very good as they inform me about everything.”

We observed that the provider consistently carried out care reviews for people who used the service, which played a key role in making sure they received appropriate care and support.

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

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA, and whether any conditions on authorisations to deprive a person of their liberty had the appropriate legal authority and were being met.

At our last inspection, systems were not in place to get consent. At this inspection, we found improvements had been made. For example, records showed clear evidence that people were involved in making decisions regarding consent. People told us that they were supported to fully understand that they have the right to change their mind or withdraw their consent at any time. One person said, “Staff respect my decisions I make as they always ask how I want to be supported before they help me with the task.”

The service maintained a current policy to guide staff on obtaining consent from people. This ensured that all staff members followed the appropriate procedures when seeking consent, aligning with best practices and legal requirements.

People’s care plans contained information regarding their mental capacity and whether they were able to give consent for each specific task being undertaken. This ensured that consent was appropriately sought and documented for all aspects of their care, in line with best practice and legal requirements.