Thinkempathy Limited

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 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 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 was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

The provider demonstrated a clear understanding of the service’s scope and the range of needs it could meet. They completed thorough pre‑admission assessments to ensure people were compatible with housemates and that staff could meet their needs. This included ensuring people had the right care related equipment in place and their prospective home met their accessibility needs.

People and relatives told us they were involved in initial assessments, and care plans reflected the outcomes agreed with them. The provider also reviewed assessments from external professionals to inform care planning. Staff told us they were given information about people’s needs before care packages commenced, this included reading care plans and discussing support approaches in team meetings.

Systems were in place to regularly review people’s needs, and staff adjusted their care accordingly. Staff told us people needed fluctuating levels of support due to their mood, health and levels of motivation. They told us they adjusted their approach depending on these circumstances. This helped to ensure people received care when they needed it.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

The provider developed policies and procedures in line with recognised best practice guidance. These included policies around safeguarding, medicines, supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people. Care plans were person-centred, current, and outlined clear approaches to positive behavioural support and least restrictive practice. Staff received specialist training relevant to people’s needs, including learning disability and autism.

Staff received training in positive behaviour support. They described how care plans guided them in using effective strategies and understanding the reasons behind people’s behaviours. This approach helped staff create positive environments, which minimised the use of restrictive practice.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people.

The provider made sure the roles of external organisations involved in people’s support were clearly defined and recorded. This helped people receive timely and appropriate input from professionals. This included joint work with health professionals and commissioners to review support needs and plan transitions.

The provider had effective systems for sharing key information across staff teams. Team meetings and individual supervisions were used to communicate updates, learning from incidents, and examples of good practice. Staff told us leaders were effective in relaying key information and staff worked together well to coordinate and deliver 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’s health needs were documented in their care plans, including how medical conditions affected their day-to-day life and the actions staff needed to take to promote good health. Where people had complex healthcare needs, the roles of staff and external professionals were clearly defined. Staff demonstrated good knowledge of each person’s health conditions and described how they encouraged people to engage with healthcare services and follow professional advice. Where some people were previously reluctant to engage with healthcare services, staff adapted their approach to each person’s circumstances, ensuring people accessed healthcare in ways that suited their needs.

Relatives told us staff encouraged people to take an active role in managing their health. This included work around nutrition, exercise and management of medical conditions. Staff told us how they used open-ended questions, conversation, and guidance to help people make informed choices about their health and lifestyle. Where individuals identified health goals and areas where they needed support, these were incorporated into their support plans. For example, some people were supported to improve their diet to promote healthier weight management.

The provider ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent. However, they did not always ensure quality and accuracy in the recording of care provided.

People and relatives told us the support they received promoted positive outcomes for their health and wellbeing. They told us that their family members had been supported to build skills and live independent lives.

Staff supported people to identify their preferred outcomes and used commissioned shared and one-to-one hours to help them work towards these. Goals included developing independence in personal care, medicines management, daily living skills and accessing the community. The registered manager had identified the need to improve accuracy in recording care activities and worked with staff to strengthen the quality of written records. This work was ongoing and important to evidence how commissioned support hours were being utilised and whether agreed outcomes of care were being met.

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

The provider had effective systems to obtain and record people’s consent to their support. People received copies of their support plans and tenancy agreements in accessible formats, enabling them to review and confirm their consent. Where people needed support to aid their understanding, family members, or appointed professionals, such as, advocates were available to help people.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and applied its principles into their daily practice. They recognised people’s rights to make unwise decisions where they had capacity and encouraged individuals to consider and weigh up risks. Staff explained that where a person’s choices posed potential safety concerns, they escalated this to senior staff for review. This balanced people’s rights and freedoms with staff’s responsibility to help keep people safe.

Staff understood the legal requirements around consent. Where people lacked the capacity to make decisions about their care, processes were in place to ensure agreed decisions were in people’s best interests. One staff member described this approach, stating, “Even if someone lacks capacity, we still consider their likes, dislikes and past wishes before any best interest decision.” This helped to ensure valid consent to care was obtained.