Registered Office

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 newly registered 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 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 appropriately and in detail. Daily care notes were maintained by people's employed staff team. People’s care plans were reviewed and updated regularly by the case managers to ensure they reflected people’s current needs.

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. People, their families, legal representatives and health and care professionals were involved in multi-disciplinary team meetings and clinical reviews every 3 months where needs were reviewed and goals were set. Clear records and information in review documents provided assurance that evidence-based care and treatment was provided for people and that the process appropriately case managed by the provider.

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. Multi-disciplinary team meetings took place and people’s directly employed staff teams kept detailed notes and information about care and support. The provider’s case managers kept in regular contact with people which ensured update reports and litigation reports were maintained and accurate.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. People’s directly employed staff team supported them to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. The provider supported people to live healthier lives by educating them about the risks associated with spinal cord injury. This supported was often initially started by the spinal injury unit staff as part of their patient education program. The provider’s case managers signposted people to evidence and guidance from the Multidisciplinary association of spinal cord injury professionals (MASCIP) and the spinal injuries association (SIA). These organisations provided people and professionals with evidence-based practice and guidance about self-care.

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. The provider’s case managers reviewed and evaluated people care that resulted in progress reports that were written and shared with people and the health, care and legal professionals involved in their on-going care and support. This approach enabled improvements in people’s health outcomes to be evidenced. For example, 1 person received support and guidance from a weight management service about how to change and improve their eating habits and diets. This enabled them to gain weight and manage their diet despite the physical and neurological changes they had experienced following their spinal injury.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when developing person-centred care and support plans. People who did not have capacity were assigned a Deputy through the Court of Protection. People had on-going involvement in their care and treatment through the process of rehabilitation and through the litigation process.