Care 24-7 Limited

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 good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement.

This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.

This service scored 58 (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 did not always make sure people’s care and treatment were effective because they did not always check and discuss people’s health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

People were involved in their assessments; however, care plans lacked important information regarding their health needs, and management or escalation of need. Care plans at times had contradictory information documented, for example, people at risk of choking were noted in their assessment information to have no choking risk, or those with mental health needs required no mental health support. People told us their care plans were not always updated.

The provider did not always plan and deliver people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them.

Relevant health information was not always detailed in people’s care documentation. For example, those with diabetic needs. Key information around diabetic management including which professionals had oversight, and key dietary information, was not included in care documentation. However, appropriate professionals were involved in people’s care, but this was not always documented.

The provider did not always work well across teams and services to support people. They did not always share their assessment of people’s needs when people moved between different services.

Staff and professionals did provide some positive feedback regarding staff teams. However, people consistently told us they wanted more consistency in the staff team involved in their care. One relative told us, "We need a smaller group of carers." This was echoed by professionals. One professional told us, “The area that I have found most challenging has been around staffing and consistency of care provision from Care 24/7.” As a result, people told us at times, they needed to tell staff how to support them.

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.

People were supported to live healthier lives. For example, through use of befriending services and reablement support.

The provider did not always routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They did not always ensure that outcomes were positive and

consistent, or that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

Outcomes were not robustly monitored due to a lack of detailed information in assessments, for example, people’s health needs. For those people who had needs relating to their mental health, there was no escalation information in people’s assessments to manage the risk of deterioration. Also, for those at risk of choking, it was not always clear that people had a modified diet in place.

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

There was appropriate consent documentation in place. One relative told us, "They do that [ask consent], and they talk to [my relative] all the time while they’re caring."