Broughton House and College

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 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Comprehensive assessments, care plans and risk assessments were in place and reflected people's individual needs and support requirements. Assessments and reviews were informed by specialist input where required, helping to ensure support remained appropriate and responsive to people's changing needs.

People, relatives, advocates and relevant professionals were involved in assessment and review processes. Communication needs and other individual support requirements were reflected within care planning, and staff demonstrated a good understanding of people's assessed needs and how these should be met.

Staff described how changes in people’s health and wellbeing were escalated and discussed with relevant professionals to ensure support remained appropriate.

Care and support were delivered in line with current good practice guidance for people with a learning disability and autistic people. However, some support plans and incident records continued to use language such as "challenging behaviour" and other behaviour-focused terminology. Whilst this was often reflective of established documentation and reporting systems, it did not always align with current person-centred approaches for autistic people and people with a learning disability.

Communication tools and specialist guidance were in place where required, and staff demonstrated a good understanding of how these informed day-to-day support. People were supported to access healthcare services and maintain their health and wellbeing.

Staff worked effectively with people, families and external professionals to deliver coordinated and person-centred care. People had access to a range of specialists and staff demonstrated a good understanding of the advice and recommendations provided.

Information was shared effectively through handovers, discussions with professionals involved in people’s care and care planning processes. Information was shared across the staff team, and specialist advice was incorporated into care planning and daily support arrangements when people's needs changed.

Relatives and professionals were positive about communication, responsiveness and collaborative working. Referrals were made when additional support was required, and staff worked proactively with partners to help ensure positive outcomes for people.

People were supported to maintain their physical and mental health and wellbeing. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people's health needs and were able to describe how they monitored for deterioration and responded to changing needs.

People had access to a range of healthcare professionals, including GPs, dentists and opticians. Health action plans and hospital passports were available where required, and staff supported people to attend appointments and follow recommendations from healthcare professionals.

People were encouraged to maintain their independence, access community activities and make choices that supported their health and wellbeing. Annual health checks, routine monitoring and referrals to healthcare professionals were completed when required.

People's health, wellbeing and quality of life outcomes were monitored through regular reviews. Care plans included personalised goals and outcomes, and staff were able to describe progress people had made in areas such as independence, communication, community involvement and daily living skills.

People, relatives and professionals were involved in reviewing care and support, and feedback was used to help inform decisions about people's ongoing needs and outcomes. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of the people they supported and were able to describe how support was adapted when needs changed.

However, it was not always clear how information gathered following incidents was used to evaluate the effectiveness of support approaches and evidence measurable improvement over time. Whilst incidents were reviewed and immediate actions taken, opportunities remained to strengthen how outcomes were monitored and how learning informed reviews of care planning, and risk management approaches.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of consent, the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and supported decision-making. Decision-specific capacity assessments, best interest decisions and DoLS documentation were in place where required, and records demonstrated appropriate involvement of families, advocates and relevant professionals.

People were supported to make decisions about their care and daily lives using communication methods tailored to their individual needs, including visual resources, accessible information and technology. Advocacy support was available and used where appropriate to support people's involvement in decision-making.

Care records reflected people's preferences, wishes and views, and staff were able to explain how they sought consent and supported people to make informed choices wherever possible.