Warrens247 Healthcare 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 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 requires improvement. This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.

This service scored 54 (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 did not always make sure people’s care and treatment were effective because they did not always check and discuss people’s health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. Whilst we found people had their needs assessed prior to using the service, these required improvements to ensure all of people's health information was included. Care plans contained some information in relation to people's likes and previous history; however, some care plans were not in place to guide staff about how to manage people's health conditions. People told us they were involved in their care planning and relatives told us they could access a digital system, which allowed them to look at care records. A relative said, “I have got a copy of the care plan with me. Before it was drawn up, the manager came to see us to find out what was needed to put in place. She was very nice.” Care plan audits and reviews were in place; however, these had failed to recognise concerns we found during our inspection.

The provider did not always plan and deliver people’s care and treatment with them. People's care records did not contain enough up to date information, including advice from external professionals. There was a lack of risk assessments and care plans relating to people's specific needs. For example, 1 person did not have a robust care plan to explain how staff assisted them to be hoisted. Another person's care plan did not contain information relating to their epilepsy and what staff should do in the event of a seizure. We also found a lack of risk assessments and care plans for a person who suffered from mental health issues.

The provider did not always work well across teams and services to support people. We could not be assured staff worked effectively across teams and services to support people, due to concerns we found in relation to falls. However, records evidenced staff worked closely with district nurse teams, pharmacists and occupational therapists. We could not be assured information shared between external agencies was correct, due to lack of, and conflicting, information found in care records. Staff told us they worked well together as a team and communication and morale was good. A staff member said, “We work as a team, supporting each other. It is a good place to work. I enjoy making a difference in people’s lives. I appreciate learning new skills and working with a supportive team.”

People and relatives told us staff supported them to manage their health and wellbeing. Whilst we found staff worked with a range of professionals to meet people's health needs, we found some incidents relating to falls which were not dealt with appropriately. People told us staff supported them with their emotional well-being, listened to them and talked to them. One person said, “I get on with staff and am very lucky with the people I’ve had. They are very good. No problems, we get on with each other.” Staff supported some people to prepare their meals and drinks.

People had regular reviews, which included gathering their feedback about their support and any improvements which could be made for them. People told us they felt listened to, and they could approach the staff and management. A person said, “I know all the managers, they are easy to talk to. I have met the manager who introduced me to the carers. They are always asking if there is anything else they could do for me.”

The provider did not always tell people about their rights around consent. The provider did not always work in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People had not signed to consent to their support. Where people, potentially, lacked the ability to make decisions, appropriate assessments of their capacity had not been completed. However, people told us staff sought their consent before carrying out tasks, and staff understood their responsibilities to seek consent from people. A person said, “[Name] feels safe with the staff that come into the house. They always stop at the door and ask if they can come in.” And a staff member said, “It is within a person’s right not to want care or treatment. I explore different options and would record people’s decisions.”