Philip Cussins 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 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 needs had been assessed and used to develop care plans.

The provider did not always plan and deliver people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. Care plans lacked sufficient information about how people needed and wanted their care. Care plans were very brief, lacked personalisation and for some care plans, sections contained no information. Staff told us they had not received training on how to write personalised care plans or how to use the electronic care planning system.
People’s nutrition and hydration needs were met, including people’s religious needs regarding food preparation. People gave positive feedback about the meals. A person said, “We get a choice everyday, if there is nothing you like they make you something else.”
 

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 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 regular access to healthcare professionals, depending on their individual needs.

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. Although there were shortfalls in governance at the home, people told us they received good care that met their expectations.

The provider told people about their rights around consent when delivering care and treatment. Staff asked people for consent before providing care. The process for completing Mental Capacity Act (MCA) assessments and best interests decisions needed reviewing. Staff told us the board of trustees had instructed them to assess the capacity of all residents, including people who had no issues with their capacity.