Honeydew Healthcare Ltd

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.

The registered manager assessed people’s needs before they started using the service to ensure needs could be met. Staff told us they received good information about people’s needs. Comments included: “[The provider’s information] tells you what disabilities people have, medication, needs, challenges. Everything about that person” and “[Assessments] are helpful, help you to know the person before you work with them,”. There were detailed care plans and staff developed risk assessments in partnership with people, so they could take positive risks.

There were frequently updated and reviewed care planning documents which changed in line with people’s needs. For example, one person was supported through dynamic care planning that adapted responsively to their changing needs. The provider worked closely with healthcare professionals including occupational therapists and the person’s family to regularly review and update their care plan. This meant the person’s needs were assessed regularly so that they received effective support which changed with their 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 told us staff provided good support for them to undertake their daily lives. One person said, “[Staff] even went and collected my prescription – that was lovely, it’s not what they are paid to do”. Other comments included: “Honeydew are able to adapt and respond to my decline” and “The provider is great at including me”. Relatives commented: “[Relative] likes music, staff will get up and dance with them” and “Staff ensure [relative] spends as much time as possible outside during the summer months as [they] love [their] garden”.

Staff completed regular training in nutrition, moving and handling, dementia and positive behaviour support to ensure their knowledge was up to date. This meant staff could deliver care in line with national guidance.

People’s care plans were developed in partnership with them and included tailored dietary recommendations based on their health conditions. Care records contained details of people’s needs and preferences and how to support them in line with their best interests.

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 joined the service.

We saw evidence of the provider working closely with relatives. Calls to relatives were initiated by the provider as a form of quality assurance. Feedback included: “The provider is responsive and maintains an open communication channel at all times”.

The provider worked in partnership with other services. For example, an assessment from a healthcare professional made some recommendations which the person was not happy to comply with. The provider supported that person through court to take back control of their right to make their own decisions.

Where support from external agencies was required, we saw evidence of good communication and partnership working. Speech and language therapists (SALT), behaviour teams, and the occupational therapy team had engaged with the service to ensure people’s changing needs were assessed. For example, a delegated nursing task had been identified by the provider who took steps to ensure this was organised collaboratively.

The provider informed us they had recently moved over to a digital based platform to document care. The registered manager was in the process of transferring all documentation across to the new platform.

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.

Staff were proactive in identifying changes in people’s health and took immediate action to ensure appropriate support. For example, staff recorded people’s daily intake of foods and fluids which were reviewed by managers to determine whether care needed to be adjusted or if a referral to healthcare professionals was required.

People had health reviews and care records contained details of how to support people and what people could do for themselves. For example, where people were recommended to maintain a healthy lifestyle, they were supported to access the community with staff, go for walks and plan their own menus which staff assisted with.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes for people were positive and consistent and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

Staff recorded observations and noted changes in a person’s health, which were reviewed by the registered manager. When a person showed signs of a reduced appetite, staff escalated concerns promptly, leading to a GP referral and adjustments to their care plan. Relatives commented: “They monitored their weight, they noticed [relative] lost a lot of weight, staff called the GP and arranged blood tests”.

The provider held regular team meetings to discuss individual outcomes, and staff were encouraged to share observations and suggestions for improvement. For example, when a person’s engagement in fluid intake declined, staff adapted their working approach to better suit the person’s, ensuring continued nutritional needs were met.

Staff maintained records of the care provided, including whether people’s needs were changing. Records demonstrated changes were shared with healthcare professionals where needed.

The registered manager told us they regularly checked care records and completed observations to make sure support was provided in a person-centred way.

The provider carefully explained to people what their rights around consent were, made sure they fully understood them and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Of the 4 staff we spoke to, all demonstrated an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act and what consent meant. People told us staff asked for consent. Staff understood the need to follow the best interest decision making process if people were assessed to lack capacity to consent to a specific decision. Staff told us “It is okay to make unwise decisions. I would not try to change a person’s view or insist. I always try to value their decision” and “I make sure decisions and options are discussed with people and are for people’s best care”.

Staff spoke to us about least restrictive measures and gave examples of how they were thoughtful in their support of people. They said they asked for consent and checked to ensure people were happy with the care provided. For example, if personal care was refused by a person, how they would support that person to understand the benefits of personal care and how refusal could affect their health and well-being.