Elliott 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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained the same.

This service scored 67 (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. Initial referral and assessment reports include detailed information about people’s care needs, which helped staff develop effective care plans. For example, reasons for the referral, health diagnosis, communication needs, people’s skills, cultural and lifestyle preferences, risks and needs identified. Assessments evidence partnership working.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, their families or advocate including what was important and mattered to them. Staff had access to best practice guidance about how to support people. Support from specialist teams was sought when required, for example the Speech and Language team [SALT]. People were supported by staff to maintain important relationships.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. Relatives told us that they were involved in information sharing. Staff worked closely with a wide range of care professionals and multi-disciplinary teams in the provision of people’s care. Staff told us they worked well together as a team and when needed would support staff in one of the provider’s other services to offer continuity of care when people accessed these services.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing. The service supported people to live healthier lives. People had hospital passports containing personalised information about them as per good practice guidance. Relatives told us their loved one’s physical health needs were met well by staff. People were encouraged to undertake sports and activities including swimming. Some people had their weight monitored to reduce the risk to their health. Where people found it distressing to visit the dentist, arrangements were made for a home visit.

One professional told us, “Residents are brought to the surgery (where appropriate) for their annual health check and supported to have their assessment done. They also attend for appropriate immunisations including Covid vaccinations.”

The provider did not always routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They did not always ensure that outcomes were recorded. Some support plans and risk assessments had not been reviewed according to the specified planned review date. Although there was evidence of discussions around supporting people to set and achieve goals, there was a lack of written evidence of how these decisions were made and how the goal was going to be achieved.

Consent was not always obtained or recorded in line with relevant guidance and legislation. We received mixed feedback regarding people’s understanding of capacity to consent to care and treatment. Social stories [a short, personalised story that describes a social situation, event or activity] about consent to physical intervention, medication and consent to a listening device were in place. However no capacity assessment was evident when we were told the person was not able to understand the decision from a social story. There was a mental capacity policy in place and most staff had completed mental capacity act and deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLs) training.