Prospect 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 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’s needs were assessed initially prior to moving into the home with particular attention paid to communication preferences so that staff could gain an understanding of people’s wishes. Care and support plans were updated regularly and documented in care records. We found care and support was delivered in line with care plans. Interactions with people were logged by staff to nutritional intake as well as other activities as outlined in careplans.

People’s needs were reviewed at a minimum monthly, with one care plan reviewed in depth each month as part of quality improvement processes. People and relatives were involved in reviews consistently.

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 and support plans and records demonstrated a good level of personalisation; evidenced through interviews with relatives who gave examples of care being organised well, involving, and informing them appropriately. Although not all people living at the service could recall being involved in developing care plans in a formal process, people indicated that they were asked about their preferences on an ongoing basis.

Care plans included detailed medical and social care histories of people, provided by relevant and appropriate partner organisations. The service ensured that people’s care was well evidenced and recorded – not provided in isolation. One example was how a person with a lifelong condition had preferences about how this was managed, and a plan had been developed with their involvement to guide staff, considering best practice and medical evidence.

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.

Stakeholder feedback was positive about this aspect of the provider’s work, with care and support plans evidencing links to other services both in terms of medical health but also social activities and involvement with voluntary organisations. One example was how staff supported people to participate in a range of activities at a local community enterprise that provided opportunities to broaden their experiences and enrich their lives through craft work, fitness, and dance.

There were strong links with medical and social care teams as evidenced from care plans and feedback from families. Families confirmed that they had access to care and support plans and were involved in developing them, attending monthly meetings, which helped people avoid sharing their stores multiple times. An example given was when someone’s weight required additional monitoring; additional guidance on weight management was sought from an appropriate service through the GP and a senior carer was named as having liaised between services and the family to help the person better manage their weight.

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.

The provider had an accessible, visual daily menu on display, but most people chose alternatives. Staff supported people to make healthy choices, and this was noted in care and support plans.

Physical activity was supported by carers, particularly when going out for walks, sometimes with their relatives.People also had the opportunity to engage in physical exercise outside the service with staff support. People told us about trips out, fitness classes and going shopping which they enjoyed. People were up and about, in and outside the service – everyone was engaged in doing something.

A person told us, “The food is nice and I can choose. I like to play football”

Another said, “I do keep fit and go walking. We pick what we want to eat and the food is nice.”

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.

Care plans indicated people’s care and support were monitored continuously. Staff were proactive in seeking support from the GP service, community nurses, or hospital appropriately. Relatives fed back consistently that communication with the service was good, so they felt confident their loved ones were supported.

A relative said, “We have been invited to review meetings once a month.”

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

Consents to care were recorded appropriately and consistently in people’s care plans. Consent to care and support was requested by carers, in a variety of ways that people understood. Care plans had good documentation covering how some people expressed themselves in non-verbal ways; behaviours for staff to be aware of when undertaking daily activities.

Relatives fed back that some people needed guidance to make decisions and that this was provided in a supportive manner. Relatives confirmed that they were involved in making decisions for people on a consistent basis.