Valleyview

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 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 ensured people received effective care and treatment by regularly assessing and reviewing their health, wellbeing, and communication needs with them and their representatives.

Any changes in support needs were communicated promptly to the staff who knew each person well, ensuring continuity and consistency of care. One relative said, “We know that our relative is monitored closely, their needs are very well known to all the staff and they are vigilant to any health risks or implications on a daily basis.”

The provider planned and delivered care in partnership with people and those important to them, ensuring what mattered to individuals was reflected in their support. Care and treatment were provided in line with legislation and current evidence‑based standards.

Care remained consistently person‑centred. Support plans were tailored to each person’s needs and developed collaboratively with them and their families. People participated in personalised activities that reflected their preferences. Care and support followed recognised best practice, including relevant National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance.

People received timely and appropriate support. Records showed referrals to external professionals were made when needed, and their recommendations were incorporated into support plans to maintain continuity and quality of care.
 

The provider worked effectively across teams and services to ensure people experienced well‑coordinated and consistent support. Information about individuals’ needs was shared appropriately when people moved between services, meaning they did not have to repeat their story.

Staff supported people to attend healthcare appointments and each person had a care passport, which gave clinicians a clear overview of their health conditions, communication needs and preferred approaches to care. This was done to help reduce stress and make sure professionals had access to the right information at the right time. Relatives spoke positively about the support staff provided when people accessed health services, describing the process as well organised and person‑centred.

The provider also worked collaboratively with internal teams and external agencies to coordinate clinics, healthcare input, and social support. Established processes ensured care and support were well integrated, including arrangements for transport where needed. This joined‑up approach helped maintain continuity, reduced delays and supported people to achieve positive outcomes.
 

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing in ways that maximised their independence, choice and control. Staff promoted healthy lifestyles and had a clear understanding of each person’s health needs. Some people required special diets, and staff followed guidance from dieticians consistently and accurately. This ensured people were able to maintain a healthy weight, contributing positively to their overall wellbeing.

There was a proactive and person‑centred approach to promoting health. People were supported to understand and manage their own health as far as possible, with staff using personalised communication approaches to help people engage in decisions about their care. Care passports contained detailed, relevant information about people’s health conditions, communication needs and preferred support approaches. These documents helped ensure continuity and safe care, especially if people needed to go to hospital, by giving healthcare professionals immediate access to essential information.
 

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment, using this oversight to drive continuous improvement. Outcomes were consistently positive, reflecting both clinical expectations and what mattered to people themselves.

People were placed firmly at the centre of their support. Records showed highly personalised and well‑maintained support plans, each containing meaningful individual goals. These were reviewed frequently and updated promptly whenever a person’s needs or aspirations changed.

Staff demonstrated detailed knowledge of people’s communication styles and behavioural cues. They recognised early signs of distress or unmet need and responded quickly and appropriately, helping to prevent escalation and maintain people’s comfort, wellbeing and engagement.
 

Mental capacity assessments and best‑interest decisions were completed where people were assessed as lacking capacity to understand and make decisions about their health and safety. Staff used visual resources to support people through the decision‑making process.

The provider respected people’s rights to choice and consent when delivering person‑centred care and treatment. Staff were knowledgeable about the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). People were supported to make everyday decisions, and staff told us they worked at each person’s pace and in their preferred way.