Giles Shirley Hall

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 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 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 were reviewed regularly, with involvement from families and professionals where appropriate or where there had been changes in circumstances. For example, reviews took place following changes in people’s needs. This ensured care and support provided to people remained relevant and responsive.

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.

Care plans included information about people’s individually assessed needs. Advice and guidance from other professionals had been incorporated into care plans, providing clear direction for staff to follow.

Observations and reviews of care records confirmed staff delivered care and support in line with people’s care plans, assessed needs and individual preferences.

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.

Care records provided evidence of collaborative working with other healthcare professionals. Feedback from professionals and staff further supported this. One staff member told us, “Giles Shirley Hall has historically had great relationships with professional services. Community nurses liaise with us around arranging annual health checks and vaccinations. We have good lines of communication with local dentists, and they will do home visits when necessary.”

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 engage in hobbies and activities of their choice, and staff made reasonable adjustments where required to enable participation. Staff also encouraged people to enjoy a healthy, balanced diet and supported them to reduce sugar intake where appropriate.

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.

Annual reviews were held with people, their families, professionals, and staff to ensure the support provided was tailored to each person’s individual needs, preferences, and goals. People’s goals were regularly discussed, and realistic steps were put in place to help them achieve these. For example, one person was supported to visit their family home after a long period away, while another was supported to plan and take a holiday.

Family members also recognised the positive impact that staff had on their loved ones. For example, one family member told us, "Now he cuddles me ...he never used to hug or cuddle ...but now he allows me to cuddle him and that's down to the staff."

Improvements were required in the recording and documentation of mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions. Some records were missing or not fully completed.

However, our observations confirmed staff were following the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). Staff had received appropriate training, did not apply unnecessary restrictions, and were able to clearly explain decisions made in people’s best interests. The provider demonstrated adherence to policy by notifying the local authority of any restrictions in place for people to support Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) applications where required.

The provider responded to feedback proactively and updated paperwork and care plans where improvements were identified.