The Care Advantage

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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated Good.

This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed.

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.

It was observed that the registered manager carried out a needs assessment together with people and their families. People were also given paper copies of the assessment once it was completed, ensuring transparency and enabling them to review their care plans at their convenience

A relative told us, “Staff understand [My person’s] routines they know how them prefers to be supported with personal care and meals, even without him being able to say it. This is feed down to staff by the manager and me following from the completed assessment that the manager completed.”

Care plans were comprehensive, incorporating each person’s, personal history and focusing on what was most important to them, including their faith and cultural preferences. This method promoted person-centred care and ensured respect for each person's unique background and values. Staff were able to access these care plans and updates about health and care requirements at people’s homes, or they would be given a copy to read before they were to deliver care and support to 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.

One relative told as, “The carer seems to be well trained and confident in supporting [people] who is non-verbal.”

The provider was aware of and implemented the right support, right care, and right culture guidance. Staff completed ongoing training to keep their skills and knowledge current. The training also included the Oliver McGowan Mandatory Training on Learning Disability and Autism.

The assistant manager told us, “We conduct frequent spot checks to observe staff carrying out their role, so we can be certain that they are following the correct way of support people as needed. These checks also provide an opportunity to give immediate feedback and address any concerns promptly. It ensures that our standard of care always remains consistent and high.”

We saw evidence that support plans were person-centred, with people's preferences recorded within the plans. Relatives told us that they were encouraged to support their loved ones to participate in decisions about their care and support, promoting collaboration for their health and wellbeing. And that staff made efforts to involve people in meaningful activities and regularly reviewed plans to ensure they reflected changing needs and wishes. This approach fostered a sense of autonomy and engagement among those receiving care.

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 provider demonstrated effective collaboration between teams and external services to ensure people received comprehensive support. By sharing assessments of people's needs as they transitioned between services, they prevented the need for individuals to repeatedly recount their circumstances.

The management team informed us that staff keep in touch with one another by phone and during staff meetings, which enables any updates regarding individuals’ needs to be communicated promptly. The assistant manager added that there are procedures in place to refer people to other agencies for additional support if necessary. For instance, this might involve contacting district nurses or doctors to seek advice and assistance in meeting residents’ needs. However, at present family manly carryout this task.

Staff told us that communication within the service is effective and positive. One staff said,” It a good place to work, we communicate between each other and the manager also keeps us updated with information we need to know in regards to any changers that will be put in place to help developed the service.

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.

Relatives told us that people’s care calls were provided by staff that people new. This enabled staff to quickly identify if a person was unwell or not themselves. Staff familiarity contributed to a sense of continuity and reassurance for people.

One Relative told us, “We always get regular carer, this is important as [My person] recognises familiar faces which helps them to be relax.”

The assistant manager told us that relatives mainly support people to access health professionals, however at times, they will also accompany people and their families if such support is required. This would include appointment to people’s GP, or hospital appointments.

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.

We saw that outcomes of people were regularly assessed to facilitate ongoing improvements. Systems for monitoring were put in place to detect emerging health concerns, and staff new who to contact for advice or support from external professional if needed. Discussions in team meetings, staff supervision sessions, and regular reviews took place to help explore methods to improve the experiences and results for those being cared for.

Care records were tailored to people’s needs and preferences, this included when a person wanted the care staff to visit as well as what tasks they needed support with. Detailed information was gathered from individuals and their families to ensure that care plans reflected their daily routines, cultural backgrounds, and specific wishes.

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

Staff completed training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and understood the principles of consent. They demonstrated an awareness of individual rights and regularly sought permission before providing support. Staff talked to people about what they were doing during caring tasks and made sure people were comfortable. We saw evidence of consent forms in people’s records.

No one was subject to court of protection directions, although the provider was aware of the legal framework around supporting people who may be at risk of being deprived of their liberty. The provider maintained up-to-date knowledge on relevant legislation and guidance to ensure compliance in all circumstances.