Anchor House - Doncaster

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 changed to inadequate This meant there were widespread and significant shortfalls in people’s care, support and outcomes.
 

This service scored 29 (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 did not make sure people’s care and treatment was effective because they did not check and discuss people’s health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. People’s care plans and assessment of needs were brief and did not contain sufficiently clear information to enable safe and effective provision of care and support. Care plans required reviews so they accurately reflect people's needs with information about how those needs should be met and risks associated with their needs mitigated. There was no evidence of ongoing consultation with the person or their representatives, where appropriate, to show if any changes were needed following discussions.

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 did not contain sufficiently detailed information about people’s care and support needs. There were referrals made to health and care services for additional support but there were no records of follow up information or implementation of advice in people’s care plans.

The provider did not work well across teams and services to support people. They did not share their assessment of people’s needs when moving between different services. People’s care plans did not show how information was shared effectively between services. There was no overall summary of people's needs or information about how care should be provided to meet their needs. This meant staff did not always understand how to meet people’s current needs. The provider failed to have systems in place to ensure staff had the information they needed to ensure people received consistent care.

The provider did not support people to manage their health and wellbeing, so people could not maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff did not support people to live healthier lives, or where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. People’s care plans and daily records of their care were poor. There was little evidence of how people’s independence was supported and maintained. People were not supported to access community health services regularly. For example, a person’s care indicated they had last visited the dentist in 2021. Where people were referred to local health services there was no record of actions and outcomes in care plans.

The provider did not routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They did not ensure outcomes were positive and consistent, or that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. People’s care plans did not capture information about people's changing needs and how outcomes for them could be improved. Daily notes and observations were not recorded clearly and there was no review or analysis of information. For example, monitoring information about people’s hydration had been collected but not reviewed or analysed. The deputy manager was unclear as to why this information had been collected and they were not aware of any analysis of the information or action taken as a result.

The provider did not always tell people about their rights around consent and did not always respect their rights when delivering care and treatment. People were asked about consent to treatment when they come into the care home but there was no evidence this had been reviewed or updated. People told us staff were waking them up early in the morning to get washed and dressed for the day without this being their preference. This meant people’s sleeping patterns were interrupted and people were being woken without prior consent. One person told us, “[The staff] like you to get up and out at 7.30am. All of us get up then, you have to get up unless you are ill then you can stay in bed. I go to bed about 9 o’clock, I could go to bed at 3 o’clock in the afternoon if I wanted to. [The staff] tell you to go to bed really quietly.”