Ourway Care Ltd

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.

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 thoroughly assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

People, and where appropriate their relative and health professionals were involved in the process to assess their needs. People were positive about the assessment process. A person told us, “Assessment was completed with the registered manager and the clinical lead at my home. I went through what I needed, and they checked what I had at home in terms of equipment.” Assessments were comprehensive and considered the person’s individual health care needs, wellbeing, communication needs, equipment used in the delivery of care and their abilities. This enabled management to ensure people received care and support that has the best possible outcomes.

People had been instrumental in developing their plan of care and support. Care plans provided clear guidance to staff on delivering care in line with the person’s preferences and details of actions to mitigate potential risks and manage health concerns. These were reviewed regularly. Staff understood people’s current needs and were alert to potential changes and deteriorating health. A person told us, “I was asked questions and was supported to complete it. They review it about 6 months. I’ve also got an emergency care plan if I was to go into hospital which states everything I need.” People’s records included information about ongoing medical treatment and emergency hospital transfer document which detailed all relevant information required by hospital staff.

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 and relatives were confident their needs were met by trained and competent staff. Management and staff worked closely with health professionals and used nationally recognised tools to assess people’s needs and develop care plans which included best practice guidance. Staff had undertaken essential and person-specific training to understand and implement best practice. This included delegated health tasks to support a person who received their food via a feeding tube, known as a ‘percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy’ (PEG). Staff were able to demonstrate how they implemented good practice in their work. Staff told us additional training was provided when needed. This had helped staff to deliver more appropriate care.

People’s care plans provided staff with clear guidance and incorporated good practice guidelines, for example, support plans were in place to enable staff to support people with catheter, PEG and oral care needs. The registered manager and clinical lead told us they kept their knowledge and practice up to date with changes in legislation and supported staff to help them deliver evidence-based care. Staff monitored and evaluated people’s outcomes in a meaningful way and adapted their care and support to help meet this.

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.

People told us staff supported them to access health care services and professionals when required. A person told us, “We have a private physio come in once a week.” Another person described how a member of staff had supported them to prepare for the visit from a district nurse to manage a health need.

The registered manager, clinical lead and staff worked well with each other and with external health professionals including working with the person and their specialist team for their ongoing health needs and treatment. The registere d manager told us they sought information and kept up to date with recognised external organisations such as the spinal injury association and shared information with the staff team.

Staff had access to the information they needed to assess, and deliver people’s care, treatment, and support. People’s records showed timely referrals were made and advice was sought when needed. When people needed to go to hospital or attend routine health appointments, staff provided the appropriate support they needed. Hospital information document contained relevant information about the person’s care and health needs, and their wishes, which enabled health professionals to provide appropriate and coordinated care and treatment required. Feedback from health professionals consistently showed management were responsive and worked in partnership to improve people’s quality of life.

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.

There was a system in place to monitor people's health and well-being. Management and staff worked well with external services to ensure people were supported to live their best life. Staff told us they worked well as a team, sharing information with one another as necessary to help ensure people received continuity of care. Staff had access to the information they needed to provide the care. This included real-time information, for instance, any changes to their routines, heath or their abilities. This meant people did not have to repeat their needs to different services and professionals.

Feedback from commissioners and professionals was positive. They told us the service was professional, knowledgeable and well organised.

People's care plans contained information about their health conditions. This helped to ensure staff knew how to safely provide the care and support people needed. People were particularly positive about the training staff received and the knowledge, skills and expertise they displayed. A person told us, “My carers, the training they get is really good. They’re pretty much experts in spinal injury. If I ever go into hospital, I have the carers look after me and not just the hospital staff. Hospital staff don’t understand my conditions. My carers are trained to recognise and manage conditions such as autonomic dysreflexia.” A relative told us, “The clinical staff are also fantastic ensuring all the important things like medications, health, care plans and day to day medical needs are in order and needs are continuously met.”

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 told us staff encouraged and supported their wellbeing and to experience positive outcomes. A person told us, “Since moving to Ourway Care I'm much happier. Staff support me to be the best version of myself and to live a fuller life as possible.” People and relatives all told us staff were well trained and knew what they were doing, which supported them to have a good quality of life.

Monitoring tools were used to track health and care needs, so action could be taken when needed. People were involved in the review of their assessed needs, health and the care and support provided, and where care plans were updated to reflect any changes to ensure they continued to receive safe and effective support. The monitoring records we checked had been completed fully and consistently, and these showed outcomes and progression towards individual goals, where identified. There was oversight of people’s care. The electronic care system had built-in alerts which enabled management to check for any delay in the delivery of care or time critical support.

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

Management and staff were trained in Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and there were systems in place to assess people’s capacity to make individual decisions. Staff had a good understanding of their responsibilities to obtain people’s consent and respected their decisions, for instance presenting information in a way the person understand and support to make their own decisions where possible. A staff member told us, “My client has the mental capacity and physical ability to express themselves; yes or no, but in various life situations, instead of verbal communication, it can be a nod or shake of a head, a blink of an eye, or movement of eyes to the side.”

People told us they were asked to agree and consent to care plan. A person told us, “They asked how I’d been looked after previously. We drew up a new plan together for my care needs and my health needs and my social needs.” People’s care plans were personalised and reflected how they wished to be supported.

The provider delivered care and support within the principles of the MCA and had met their legal requirements. Care records showed people’s mental capacity was assessed. When a person lacked the mental capacity to make certain decisions about their care, the registered manager had liaised with the person’s representative with the appropriate legal authority, and the relevant professionals were involved to make decisions in the person’s best interests. Where a person had an active community deprivation of liberty safeguard authorisation, their care records showed the provider had met their legal responsibilities and ensured the person’s representative was consulted in all decisions made about their care and support.