Detailed Care 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.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated 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.

Care plans were person‑centred, up to date, and reflective of people’s individual needs and preferences. Staff demonstrated confidence in accessing care plans and understanding the information recorded. People’s daily notes were completed regularly and accurately, supporting continuity of care and effective communication within the team.

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 recorded nutrition and hydration needs clearly within care records and task systems to ensure people received appropriate and timely support. Care plans reflected individual dietary requirements, preferences, and risks, supporting safe and person‑centred care.

Staff received training to support people with more complex needs, including conditions such as stroke and sepsis. This training enabled staff to recognise changes in health and respond appropriately, ensuring nutrition and hydration support was delivered in line with evidence‑based guidance and individual needs.

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.

The provider worked closely with occupational therapists (OTs) and other external professionals to support people’s needs. Information and recommendations received from OTs were shared with the provider and followed appropriately to ensure care and support were delivered safely and in line with professional guidance.

The provider also worked in partnership with the pharmacy to support safe and effective medicines management.

Feedback from an external professional highlighted positive collaborative working. They stated, “[The registered manager] and I have had several conversations and are both keen to support each other in the community.”

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 provider worked effectively with OTs to support people’s physical and emotional wellbeing. One example demonstrated positive outcomes for a person who had not previously left their home due to anxiety. Following face‑to‑face discussions and collaborative goal setting, the provider and OT supported the person by breaking activities into manageable steps. As a result, the person was able to attend a wedding, visit coffee shops, and regain confidence in getting dressed and leaving the home.

The provider encouraged healthier lifestyle choices, including participation in activities such as hydrotherapy where appropriate. Staff were able to support people to access and engage in these activities safely.

Staff received condition‑specific training, including diabetes awareness and Parkinson’s training, to enable them to support people to manage their health effectively. The provider liaised with specialist professionals, including Parkinson’s nurses, to ensure care and advice reflected best practice and individual health needs.

Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of their role in promoting healthy living. One member of staff stated, “I make sure they eat healthily and give people healthy choices. I prompt and ensure they are getting enough nutritional food and water, and I will report any concerns.”

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.

The provider used monitoring tools to assess and improve outcomes for people. A pressure ulcer monitoring tool was in place to support the early identification, monitoring, and management of skin integrity risks. Where concerns were identified, advice was sought from relevant health professionals, including district nurses. Guidance provided was followed appropriately by the provider and reflected within care planning and daily support.

The provider demonstrated effective partnership working and information sharing to improve outcomes. An external professional reported positive practice in relation to monitoring nutrition and hydration, stating, “[The registered manager] has provided the carers with a booklet to record information related to all meal times including any difficulties noticed during that time. It has been very useful as I have had a wider picture of the difficulties the patient has had when eating, drinking, and swallowing. It means that I am better informed when recommending strategies and providing information for care plans.”

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

The provider discussed consent to care during the pre‑admission process to ensure people understood and agreed to the support being offered. Consent was revisited as part of ongoing care to ensure it remained valid and appropriate.

All staff were up to date with consent and Mental Capacity Act (MCA) training and demonstrated an understanding of their responsibilities. At the time of the review, there were no people using the service who lacked capacity, and no Mental Capacity Assessments (MCAs) had been required or completed.

Staff confirmed they sought consent prior to providing care and documented this appropriately. One member of staff stated, “Yes, always and I document it in the tasks.”