The Martlets

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.

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.

People and their relatives told us they were involved in the planning and reviewing of their care. A relative told us, “The family contributed to [my relative’s] care plan, including that she would be reluctant to admit if she was having problems.” Care plans we looked at showed a comprehensive assessment had taken place to ensure people’s needs could be met. The care plans were informative and clear.
The registered manager described the process of assessing people before they moved into the service, and how they ensured they could meet people’s needs. Assessments also included any specific equipment needed, or any further training that staff may require.
 

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 were supported in line with their needs, including their nutrition and hydration needs. A relative told us, “[My relative] has to have his food mashed and they spoon feed him, always very gently, they never rush him.” Staff told us people's care plans were kept up to date to include their current needs, how these were to be met and desired outcomes. Staff told us they assisted people to access the support they needed from other professionals and services.

Processes were in place which showed people’s needs had been identified and continued to be reviewed and amended. Where people had specific nutritional requirements, staff were aware of these and supported people accordingly. Nationally recognised assessment tools were used. Concerns were escalated quickly and acted on. Support from specialist teams was sought when required.
 

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.

There was good communication and joint working between the service and professionals. We received positive feedback from people and professionals. Paperwork we saw demonstrated collaborative working, with staff and professionals sharing information about people and their needs.

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 told us they received support to access healthcare, inside and outside of the service. A relative told us, “With [my relative’s] diabetes, they have to test for blood sugars quite frequently. Someone spotted that his skin was really frail, so they got one of the newer test devices which need only a tiny blood sample and is much kinder.” Staff were confident they would recognise when there were changes in people’s health and wellbeing. One member of staff told us, “I know people well, for example, one man has been here 3 years, and I have seen him get more forgetful over time. I know people well, so I would know if they were not themselves.”

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

People experienced positive outcomes and had planned goals for the future. Feedback from staff confirmed people’s care and progress were monitored. Staff were knowledgeable and supportive of people's goals and wishes. A relative told us, “[My relative’s] stroke left her paralysed down one side. They have changed lots of things and she now gets hoisted into her wheelchair so she can be with other people and be part of various activities.” Processes were in place to ensure people’s outcomes were monitored, and any changes were implemented. This was evidenced in people’s care plan reviews. Care plans were audited to ensure regular reviews took place and any actions were followed up.

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

Previous areas requiring improvement identified at the last inspection had been met in respect to mental capacity assessments being in place for those who needed them. People had been assessed for their capacity to consent to aspects of their care. When people were assessed as lacking capacity to make specific decisions, best interest decisions were carried out. These were documented and showed who was involved in the decision-making process and how the decision had been reached. One person told us, “I can do what I like, it’s up to me.”
Staff knew about consent and had received appropriate training. One member of staff told us, “I look at if people have capacity or a DoLS. I can make a best interest decision for people, it’s about what is best for people.”