CareTech Community Services Limited - 196 High Street Also known as Hunters Lodge

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to premises and equipment. Improvements were found at this assessment and the provider was no longer in breach of this regulation.

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.

There had been significant improvements to the information recorded about people for example what was important and mattered to them. Each person had their own keyworker who was responsible for a particular person. We reviewed some of the minutes and we found them to be repetitive and they lacked purpose. The registered manager was in the process of improving how key working sessions were facilitated.

Staff were appropriately trained and delivered evidence-based care. This was confirmed by health professionals who told us people’s health needs were being met. Staff supported people and acted on concerns in a timely manner to address specific health issues. We saw examples of staff supporting people to attend appointments and follow up care was actioned. People had daily care notes completed by staff and we saw examples of repositioning charts and food diaries being completed in line with peoples care plans.

The staff worked with external professionals to support people, and we saw evidence of referrals when needed, one health care professional told us ‘’ The staff have been very proactive at contacting health professionals around the patients’ needs and they to try and get them seen by the right team. We saw examples of staff being proactive when specific medical equipment needed fixing and trying to be solution focused when obstacles occurred.

The provider supported people to manage their health however there needed to be improvements to ensure people’s nutritional and hydrational needs had been met. On the first day of the site visit there was no fresh fruit in the kitchen, staff told us they were expecting a food order, we noted the food been ordered was highly processed and there was significant amount of frozen food, staff told us they put frozen meals for people who went to the daycentre but some staff agreed that the quality of the food could be improved. One person also told us they were trying to lose weight and trying to eat healthy.

People’s care, treatment and outcomes were monitored, staff logged daily what people did and there were discussions at handovers if there were any concerns. The registered manager spoke about the importance reviewing people’s care to ensure their needs were met. The registered manager also carried out spot checks and had recently carried out a night check. They found care was being provided in line with people’s care plans.

Records showed people’s capacity had been assessed in line with the Mental Capacity Act and staff followed best interest decision processes when needed. Some people did not use words to communicate. Staff used visual and verbal prompts and gestures to support meaningful decision making.All staff understood about the importance to gain consent before providing care and support. Consent was clearly recorded in people’s care plans. This was reviewed yearly or when there was a change in people’s understanding. Where people could not consent, a best interest process was followed.