Kind Tailored 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 newly registered 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.

The registered manager explained the initial assessment process for each person varied depending on their needs. Having initially met people, a transition plan was developed which focused on the person’s needs, compatibility and skill set of staff and an understanding of each person’s wishes as well as information about their previous placements and support. People were given the time they needed to get to know staff and view new accommodation (if required). The registered manager and staff made connections and carried out research about people’s preferred areas of living to ensure appropriate and local health and social care would be available to people as well as activities in the community.

People’s care records were reviewed regularly as people settled into the service and established new routines.

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.

People’s personal care was provided under a separate contractual arrangement to their housing needs. People were supported to have full control and choice over how they lived their lives. The registered manager agreed to carry out an audit of people’s tenancy agreements to demonstrate that all actions have been taken to ensure people have the same rights, choices and control of their home as other people who rent accommodation.

People were supported in line with CQC’s ‘Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture’ guidance. The registered manager provided many examples of positive outcomes for people such as supporting people to improve their fitness, reduction in psychotropic medicines and supporting people to attend events of their choice in the community.

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.

Each person was supported by a core staff team who had been trained in their needs and knew them well. Systems were in place to share information between the staff team and the management of the service. Staff had access to information and guidance provided by health professionals. They worked collaboratively with healthcare professionals and implemented their recommendations. People’s care records were updated in line with professional recommendations.

The provider did not always implement recorded systems to manage and monitor their health and wellbeing, so people could not always maximise their independence, choice and control.

We found no impact on people as staff supported people to live healthier lives such as attending annual health checks to help reduce their future needs for care and support. However, we found there were no routine systems in place to manage and monitor people’s routine healthcare needs such as vaccinations, blood tests, breast and testicular screening, dental reviews and vision and hearing assessment.

Health action plans for each person would assist the registered manager in monitoring people’s needs and provide clarity of who was responsible for actions required and the timeframes. This was raised with the registered manager who agreed to implement systems to monitor people’s health checks.

People’s nutrition and hydration needs were met. Staff monitored people’s nutritional wellbeing and encouraged healthy choices. People worked with staff to explore healthy diets and had the opportunity to develop their kitchen skills.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent.

Staff worked with people to set achievable goals and monitored progress to ensure positive outcomes. The registered manager visited people regularly in their homes and worked alongside the staff team. This enabled the registered manager to monitor people’s wellbeing and ensure they lived a life of their choice.

Managers and staff worked tirelessly with people to overcome barriers, take positive risks and improve people’s outcomes. The staff and management team were committed to support people and provided examples of how they had sustained people’s care and support package to prevent hospital admissions or placement breakdowns.

We signposted the registered manager to CQC’s quality of life tool to assist them in developing an auditing system to monitor how people lived their lives and to demonstrate positive outcomes.

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

People, and their relatives where necessary, gave consent to the care and treatment they received, and people’s liberty was promoted in line with legal guidance.

People’s capacity to make specific decisions was assessed and recorded in their care plans. People’s relatives and relevant health or social care professionals were involved to make best interest decisions on the person’s behalf as needed. We saw best interest decisions made in relation to specific aspects of their care.

Staff had completed training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and understood their responsibilities to obtain consent from people in line with the MCA. Staff understood the principles of MCA and DoLS and supported people in the least restrictive way.