Consensus Support Services Limited - Moor Lane

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.

This service scored 79 (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. The service worked with people’s network of family and professionals to support effective care. Care plans and risk assessments were regularly reviewed with people and their families. These were updated when people’s needs changed. For example, when there were changes in people’s health. People’s views and preferences were described such as, their daily activities and how they wished people to engage with them. A relative said, “They know [Name of person] likes and dislikes. [Name of person] would tell them.”

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. Staff received training in best practice. For example, around epilepsy, nutrition and oral care. Staff had training in positive behaviour approaches and could describe how they supported people to minimise frustration or distress. Where physical intervention may be required for 1 person in a particular circumstance, this had been carefully assessed and planned for. Guidance, with input from external professionals, directed staff in safe approaches. A person living at the service had been invited to be involved in the delivery of nationally recognised training for local care staff in learning disability and autism.

People were supported with their nutrition and hydration needs. Information about people’s diets and preferences were included in people’s care plan and were accessible in kitchen areas. Risks around choking were identified and guidance clear on how to support people safely. For example, how people should be positioned when eating or how food should be prepared. We observed people being supported in line with their care plans. People were encouraged to be involved in food preparation in individual ways. This included gaining sensory experiences from food preparation. A relative told us, “[Name of person] loves food, being involved in shopping and helping cooking.” The home supported people around healthy eating choices. Relatives said, “It’s a good, balanced diet,” and “A healthy diet, plenty of fruit.”

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. Systems shared information within the staff team effectively. For example, through a communication book and both verbal and written staff handovers. This meant staff were up to date with people’s current needs. Information was coordinated with other teams involved in people’s care. This included health specialists and the GP. A health professional said, “The manager and team are responsive and keep us fully updated.”

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 with their individual health needs and this included ensuring people accessed annual health reviews. Information in care plans was clear around actions staff should take and how to escalate any health concerns. The staff team were alert in observing and managing any changes in people’s health. A health professional said, “They contact me appropriately for advice.”

The service had positive relationships with health professionals who valued the home’s knowledge of people. There was a consistent relationship with the GP who knew people well. A relative said, “They are competent at arranging appointments.” The service kept accurate records in regard to people’s health. This enabled information sharing with professionals. A relative commented, “Their record keeping, even the hospital doctor when he looked at the seizure pattern, and medicines was impressed by their recordkeeping.”

People were supported to engage in activities to promote their health and well-being. For example, swimming, socialising and being outside in nature. Where concerns were identified these were followed up with the relevant health professionals. For example, physiotherapist or epilepsy nurse.

The provider monitored all people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they fully met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

People’s outcomes of their care and support were regularly reviewed and changes made as needed. The service worked with professionals to ensure people’s health was well managed and people could enjoy a good quality of life. A health and social care professional said, “The team have managed to get [Name of person] mobilising again which is impressive. They manage complex health needs to a high standard. The manager’s dedication and staff continuous support has led to positive outcomes [Name of person’s] life has changed for the better when they moved into Moor Lane.” Staff were observant in people’s presentation and escalated concerns to ensure people received additional support where needed. For example, the service was currently working with professionals around 1 person’s mental health. A health professional said the service was, “Wanting to be proactive about developing approaches to reduce [Name of person] distress.”

The service monitored how people’s health and well-being outcomes reflected in their quality of life. For example, activities people participated in were monitored to see how people engaged. The service provided tailored opportunities and adapted outcomes to align with people’s life journey. A relative said, “[Name of person] has a good quality of life.” A health and social care professional said, “[Name of person] has had their life transformed since moving to Moor Lane and we could not ask for a better outcome.”

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People’s views and wishes were reflected in their care plans. We observed people being consulted and their choices respected. For example, about what activity they wished to participate in or if they wanted to return to their room. In conversation, 1 person told us staff ask what they like and what they want.

People’s capacity to consent was considered for specific areas of their care. Mental capacity assessments and associated best interest decisions, where people lacked capacity to consent were completed as appropriate. For example, around safety equipment which restricted movement like lap belts. Information was presented to people using their preferred communication methods. The service ensured those people relevant to the person were included in decisions like family members and health professionals.