Larwood

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

People had the best possible outcomes because their care needs were assessed. People, their relatives and advocates were involved in the assessment and review in their care. Their care, support and treatement reflected their needs and any protected equality characteristics.

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.

People's human rights were upheld by staff who supported them to be independent and have control over their own lives. Care plans promoted independence with people being encouraged to do as much as they could for themselves.

A relative told us, 'I have noticed they treat [relative] with respect and always ask [their] permission.'

Support focused on people's quality of life outcomes and met best practice. Support was provided in line with people's care plans including communication plans, sensory assessment and positive behaviour support plans.

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.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

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.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

A relative told us, "I have noticed they treat [relative] with respect and always ask [their] permission."

Staff understood their roles and responsibilities under the Human Rights Act 1998, Equality Act 2010, Mental Health Act 1983 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005. This meant that people who lacked capacity or had fluctuating capacity had decisions made in line with current legislation.

Staff told us there no restrictions or blanket rules in place and that people were given choices over what they wanted to do for example choosing their food and activities.