The Horizon (New) 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 supportachieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been ratedgood. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmedthis.

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 met with people and their relatives before packages of care started to ensure their needs could be met by the service. The provider completed a needs assessment. This detailed people’s communication, oral care and mental capacity, preferences and support needs.

The provider’s systems ensured staff were up to date with national legislation, evidence-based good practice and required standards. Policies and procedures were underpinned by national guidance and legislation. Staff received training in line with Skills for Care. A relative said, “Staff are skilled at what they do, they must be. Sometimes they handle the most of difficult circumstances. They handle these very well”. Staff told us they were aware of people’s choices, preferences and needs to ensure they received the correct support with nutrition, hydration, personal care and assistance with domestic tasks. The provider followed good practice to ensure staff provided care and support to people in line with local and national guidance and legislation.

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.Feedback from professionals was positive in how the service planned and delivered care. Comments included, “All the care was planned to meet the needs of [Person]. The service was easy to work with, communicative, and flexible.”

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 involved in making decisions on the support and care they needed. Care plans clearly described the support they needed and what people could do for themselves. People were encouraged to set goals such as increasing independence at home and managing their medications and finances.

People using the service had their nutritional needs assessed where appropriate. Information about people's preferred food, drink, food allergies, likes and dislikes were recorded. If any needs were identified with eating or drinking people were referred to the appropriate health care professionals for advice and support.

From talking with staff, it was evident they listened to people and acted on what was being said in respect of their needs, aspirations and wishes. The registered manager said, “If there are any changes which require professional input, we make a referral. We made a referral to the mental health team when a person was struggling to sleep. The psychiatrist adjusted [Persons] medication. Now [Person] sleeps well. This has improved [Person’s] well-being”.

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.

Staff routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. There was evidence of regular reviews and action being taken immediately following any changes to people’s health care needs. During reviews, staff discussed care needs to improve people’s outcomes. The registered manager carried out regular audits to monitor and improve outcomes.

The provider did not always tell people about their rights around consent and did not always respect their rights when delivering care and treatment.

Staff at the service told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People’s consent to care and support was respected by staff. However, some improvements were needed to the records to ensure mental capacity documents contained all relevant information and were documented in line with the Mental Capacity Act guidance. The provider maintained general consent records; however, consent for medication was documented using the GP’s forms instead of the provider’s own documentation and a mental capacity assessment form, as required. There was no evidence the provider had independently reassessed the person’s capacity to consent to medication. As a person’s capacity can change over time, it is important to reassess this regularly. The provider acknowledged this and confirmed action would be taken.