Kerwin Court

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 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 service carried out detailed pre assessments of people’s needs and used these to shape the support they received.

Following the initial assessment, people had regular reviews where they discussed current support levels including goals and objectives. A relative told us, “A psychologist attended the hospital my loved one was in to complete a pre-admission assessment before my loved one’s placement was accepted, and assessments continue regularly to monitor their progress.” One professional said, “During the face-to-face assessment of referrals they seek to access further information from notes, talking to staff working with the patient as well as meeting the patient in person.” A person living at the service said, “The occupational therapist pre assessed my needs before I came here.”

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.

The service used evidence-based tools to support people’s needs effectively which included a combined waterlow and MUST (Malnutrition universal screening tool) assessment to indicate people’s risk around pressure areas. People were involved in shaping the care and support they received with individual goals being prioritised. People told us they are given choice in all aspects of their care and support one person said, “They include me and ask me what matters to me, my goal is to remain as independent as possible.” There was equipment available to aid people in their rehabilitation with oversight from in house occupational therapists and the service also benefited from having a Physiotherapist, Clinical Neuro Psychologist and other specialist staff available to assess people‘s needs which enabled other staff to deliver effective support to people.

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.

The staff acted promptly when changes were observed in the people they were supporting and contacted the relevant health professionals such as the GP in a timely manner. One professional said, “Staff will contact to discuss particular issues or concerns for the people they are supporting.”

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. One person told us, “I used to use a wheelchair to mobilise but following physical rehabilitation I now walk with a stick.” People received specific support in line with their personal rehabilitation goals that focused on independence and daily life skills. One person told us, “My goal is to remain as independent as possible.” Another person said, “I used to need support with my morning routine but now I do this for myself.” Staff had clear care plans to follow which aligned with these goals. A staff member said, “Choice is important, and people’s care plans refer to offering people choice.”

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

People received support from a variety of staff including rehabilitation support workers who provide direct support. Any changes were discussed with leaders and people’s care plans were updated to reflect these. people’s outcomes were achieved through collaboration between professional and clinical staff. A staff member told us, “A lot of people make progress and go back to the community and families following their rehabilitation.” Staff supported people to aim to achieve their goals and make progress through a rehabilitation process. This led to people gaining the skills they needed to move into other more independent accommodation, returning to their relatives and an increase in general independence. When describing goals a person told us, “My transition is being planned I’m aiming towards moving to a flat when I'm ready.” When speaking about a person whose condition suddenly changed staff said, “If a person’s needs cannot be met at the service, we support them to get the care they require. In the interim staff receive training in awareness about their support needs for example, a person who was given a terminal diagnosis was supported until a new placement was found that could meet their needs.”

People understood their rights around consent to the care and treatment they were offered.

People receiving support and their relatives told us that staff regularly sought consent around all aspects of the care and support they provided. One staff member told us, “A person they support has aphasia, so we use a different method to communicate with them and use this method to gain consent.” A person told us, “They include me and ask me what matters to me.” Mental capacity assessments were being carried out with best interest decisions where people lacked capacity and staff understood and respected people’s need for consent. One person told us, “They always check with me before they support me.”