The Trees

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,treatmentand support achieved good outcomes and promoteda good qualityof life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key questiongood. At thisassessmentthe rating hasremainedgood.

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.

People had their needs assessed before they came to the home. This helped to make sure The Trees was the right place for them. Care plans were developed from initial assessments to support staff in providing care which was in accordance with people’s individual needs and preferences. They consulted with the person and their relatives where appropriate to help develop personalised care plans. A relative of a person who regularly uses the service told us, “There is a pre-visit call to me about a week before [person] goes to catch up on anything that has changed.”

One staff member told us, “Each person is allocated a key worker. The key worker works with person, family, carers, day services to create care plans. Prior to people using the service, staff complete pre-stays documents with individuals and families. If there has been a change in care and supports needs since their last visit this is discussed and documented on the pre-stay. Staff on duty will then update the care plan to reflect the changes prior to the person coming to The Trees.”

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.

Staff demonstrated a good knowledge of best practice and how to support people with different needs. They had undertaken a wide range of training, including training about people’s conditions and health needs. Comments from staff included, “We speak to the people themselves because some of them are able to tell us if they are not well. We can also speak to their families or carers if they have observed the same things or deterioration. We notice changes through observation, and we communicate with other members of the multidisciplinary team involved in caring for someone so that we can be signposted to the right professional to support us with that person’s care needs.”

Staff kept clear records of any visits or correspondence with healthcare professionals, documenting the reason for the visit, actions and outcomes. This helped ensure medical advice was followed.

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 moved between different services.

Staff and leaders worked closely with external professionals to ensure care and support was consistent. Information was passed on to staff during meetings to ensure staff were up to date with current information and events. One external partner told us, “[The Trees]have good organisational and proactive skills. They can identify triggers and look to see how these can be managed within the service noting their own accountability and responsibilities.  They have good communication skills too and are prompt in identifying issues so collaboratively we can resolve/reduce the risk together. They are very approachable, hardworking, and conscientious in their efforts to ensure the individuals in their care are safe and they are meeting their care and support needs appropriately.”

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.

The staff worked closely with healthcare professionals, to meet the needs of people who stayed at The Trees. People’s healthcare needs were assessed and planned for to show how the staff would meet these.

One health care professional told us, “It is good to see staff engaging and wanting to make a difference. They are also willing to work with the wider multi-disciplinary team and follow their recommendations too.”

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

People’s clinical risks were clearly outlined in their care records, including signs and symptoms of health deterioration for staff to monitor and escalate if required. One health care professional told us, “Multi agency meetings or [care and treatment review] plans are followed up and completed and shared with health and social care, recommendations and plans by allied health professionals i.e. SALT, OT, psychology, psychiatry are actioned promptly.”

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) establishes the legal framework for decision-making on behalf of individuals who may lack the capacity to make specific decisions themselves. The MCA requires that, wherever possible, individuals are supported to make their own decisions. When a person is assessed as lacking capacity for a particular decision, any decision made on their behalf must be in their best interests and represent the least restrictive option available. Where individuals were assessed as lacking capacity, mental capacity assessments had been completed.

Staff had completed training on the MCA and demonstrated a clear understanding of its principles. Where people required assistance with decision-making, staff were able to tell us how they applied best-interest decision processes and ensured that any actions taken were the least restrictive option. One staff member told us, “If someone does not have the capacity to consent, we consult their family members or carers to see if they are in agreement that decisions relating to the supported person’s care are made in their best interests.”