Lifeways Community Care (Halifax)

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

Our last rating of this key question was good. At this assessment the rating remains unchanged.

People were fully involved in assessing and reviewing their needs and chose who they would like to be involved in this process. This resulted in person centred care plans which people were fully involved in developing.

Staff understood matters around consent and people said staff always sought their consent before providing support. Where people lacked capacity, the principles of the Mental Capacity Act were followed. This included ensuring best interest processes were followed, protecting people’s rights.

This service scored 79 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People said they were included in planning for their needs and wishes and were asked for their opinions. They felt staff understood what they needed and how to provide this. One person showed us booklets that they and others had created to provide a pictorial guide to positioning wheelchairs correctly in their vehicles. This included how to prepare appropriately when taking someone on an activity who has personal care needs. Another person had developed their own photo book of how they wanted staff to support them.

When a person had not been well enough to take place in the review of their needs, this had been postponed until the person was able to give their input.

Staff talked about the importance of involving people as much as possible in their own planning and reviews and gave examples of using Makaton or images to communicate with people. They knew people very well and ensured individualised care and activity plans were in place for them.

The registered manager told us person centred reviews took place annually with people and they were encouraged to invite family and other people involved in their care. Where people preferred more frequent reviews this was included in the persons support plan and reviews following change of need took place as required.

We did not receive any feedback from partners in relation to assessing needs.

Care plans were person centred and showed people’s needs were fully assessed in a range of areas addressing their physical, mental, emotional, and social needs. Effective processes ensured these were regularly reviewed and kept up-to-date and accurate. The processes in place for initial and ongoing assessment of people's needs had enabled people to receive outstanding outcomes. Short term care plans had not always been developed. For example, when a person required a short course of medication. The service manager addressed this immediately.

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.

People said that staff were respectful and always asked for consent before supporting them. One person said, "They always ask if it's ok before helping me, even though we know each other really well and they know what I will need."

Staff talked about the importance of ensuring the person was at the centre of any support they provided, and ensuring this was done in a respectful way. A member of staff said, “If it's [someone] who doesn't communicate verbally very much, we still explain slowly and clearly how we'd like to help and watch their physical responses, or we sign how we'd like to help them."

The registered manager told us they tried to arrange advocacy services for people as needed.

Processes were in place to ensure people's consent was sought.

Where people lacked capacity, the principles of the Mental Capacity Act were followed. This included ensuring best interest processes were followed, protecting people’s rights.

Capacity assessments were completed and where people lacked capacity best interest assessments were in place for relevant areas. Best interest assessments evidenced how staff had tried to involve the individual with the decision and then followed up with people's representatives.

People had clear communication care plans which described their preferred way of communicating and potential barriers. This supported staff to help people make choices on a day-to-day basis.

Clear care plans were in place around managing restrictions and appropriate Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) applications had been made.

All staff were given training on consent and informed consent with additional support given to team leaders.