Care By Us 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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Outstanding. At this assessment the rating has changed to Good. This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and people’s feedback confirmed this, however we found consistency could be improved.

This service scored 83 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People told us that their needs were assessed before receiving service. One person told us, “My assessment was done with me present, and it is reviewed yearly with me. I am happy with my care plan, and it is what they try to follow.” A relative told us, “I was involved with [their] assessment, and I couldn’t fault it.”

Staff told us they were made aware when a person was to begin receiving a service. They told us that they did not have any input into the assessments but were able to give feedback to senior staff and managers once the care package commenced if they felt that changes were required. One member of staff told us, “I get to know people when they start to receive a service through the app which provides details of who gets service and their care plan. I can share my contribution to their care plan.”

Staff told us they were aware people’s needs were reviewed. They told us that changes were made to care plans and risk assessments, which were made available to them.

Care plans seen had a set format. When this was followed, the computerised care planning system identified the areas of care that needed to be planned for each person. Where reviews were completed, amendments were made to the care plan in place.

Tools were used to assess people’s level of risk in relation to aspects of their health such as Waterlow, for skin integrity, and MUST, for nutrition.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

People told us they were aware of the services available to them and how their care was to be delivered, but in some areas of the service, people felt that they did not receive care from consistent staff. One person told us, “Some staff treat me well but it depends on who comes. Some are strangers and they have to ask me what they need to do to help me.”

People and their relatives told us that communication was an area that required improvement.

Staff told us they felt they would benefit from being included more with partner agencies and other services and would like to learn more.

Some staff felt that communication within staff teams, between services and from the provider could be improved.

Feedback from partners was overall positive. They told us that the service engaged with them and ensured they were kept informed.

People’s care plans detailed contact information for partner agencies that were involved in their care.

We saw that advice and guidance from partners was included in some of the records we reviewed. We also saw that information from online resources had been included in care plans, such as information regarding specific conditions, however this had not always been personalised to the individual.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

People and their relatives were not always clear on the expected outcome of their service or how this was being monitored. One relative told us, “The care plan started when [they were] in hospital and social services were involved. It is reviewed regularly but I don’t know what the outcome of the care should be.”

Staff were not always clear on people’s outcomes or their contribution in improving people’s care. One member of staff told us, “I’m not sure if people do have any outcomes but I provide the care I can and what is expected.” Another staff member told us, “I have asked for more support and training on planning care and asked to be more involved, but nothing has been forthcoming.”

Outcomes of people’s care and treatment were recorded in care plans; however, it was not always clear of the persons level of involvement.

We found for some people that goals recorded for people were not meaningful and it was not always clear from the records we reviewed how outcomes for people were being monitored.

We did not look at Consent to care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.