Archived: Ideal Home

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 71 (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 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. 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 and their relatives were actively involved in assessments and reviews of their care and support needs. People were listened to, and their choices and preferences were considered when their care and support needs were assessed.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. 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 used nationally recognised tools appropriately to assess and monitor people’s needs, including Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) to assess the person’s risk of malnutrition. We saw how a person’s MUST score, combined with their current weight was input on the provider’s electronic record system. This information was then used to ensure the person’s pressure relieving mattress was set up to ensure it was providing the correct amount of pressure relief to protect their skin.

The provider did not always support people to manage their health and wellbeing, so people could not always maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff did not always support people to live healthier lives, or where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. Records showed people were supported to maintain their health, however, in the care plans we checked there was an absence of information of how people’s dental care would be maintained. People were not supported to attend regular dental checks. We shared this with the provider who said they had identified this and would be taking action to improve people’s access to dental care.

The provider did not always support people to manage their health and wellbeing, so people could not always maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff did not always support people to live healthier lives, or where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. Records showed people were supported to maintain their health, however, in the care plans we checked there was an absence of information of how people’s dental care would be maintained. People were not supported to attend regular dental checks. We shared this with the provider who said they had identified this and would be taking action to improve people’s access to dental care.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive and consistent, and they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. Staff monitored people on a day-to-day basis to ensure the care and treatment they were receiving was achieving the desired outcomes. We reviewed charts and progress notes and saw staff were accurately recording people’s bowel movements, and food and fluid intake. People’s weights were monitored, and any ongoing concerns were escalated to healthcare professionals.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. We saw where people were deprived of their liberties, the provider had sought authority to do so. Where people’s needs changed and restrictions needed to change, the provider informed the authorising body. For example, one person had in the past refused to take their medication and the home had approval to administer them covertly but over time the person had become compliant and so this was changed. Where people lacked capacity to make decisions, the provider ensured decisions were made in their best interests and implemented the least restrictive option. Staff we spoke to were knowledgeable about supporting people to make decisions. We saw staff asked people for permission to support them throughout our visit and respected people’s right to decline.