George Beal House

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 remained Good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

People’s needs, preferences and choices were assessed prior to them receiving support and treatment. The provider carried out a comprehensive assessment with people and their relatives to ensure they could meet their needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
 

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, well-being and communication needs with them.People's needs were assessed before they started using the service to help ensure their needs and expectations could be met and people and relatives were involved from the start of their care package. So that each person's visit to George Beal House was a positive experience, the provider completed a transition process which started with short visits to the service, building up to an overnight stay and then several overnight stays. A relative said, “Before [family member] goes for their respite stay the staff contact me to see if there is anything they need to know or any changes in [family member]. We work together as a team.”

There was a transition booklet available in a pictorial format to support people to understand the process of staying at the service better. We were told by the registered manager that each transition was tailored to the needs of the individual. We saw feedback in the transition guide from a relative that read, “The transition was at [family members] pace and it was great that they got to visit and meet everyone and get to know the building, it really helped a lot.”

The management team informed us they worked in partnership with other healthcare professionals and agencies when needed. Records confirmed that people’s needs, preferences and choices were reviewed prior to each respite visit and families were involved in this process wherever possible. Staff had access to people's care plans and risk assessments, so they could understand how to meet people's needs.

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.

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

People were encouraged to be involved in making their own decisions. Staff knew about people's capacity to make decisions through verbal or non-verbal means, and this was recorded in their care plans. A relative told us, “They always try to give [family member] as much choice as possible. I have seen them use pictures to help people communicate.”

Staff told us, and records confirmed they received Mental Capacity Act (MCA) training as part of their individual training schedule. The staff demonstrated they fully understood and practiced the MCA principles.